ICEL 2013 Proceedings Volume 2 by ACPIL

Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on

e-Learning

Cape Peninsula University of Technology,

Cape Town, South Africa

27-28 June 2013 VOLUME TWO

Edited by

Dr Eunice Ivala Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape To Town, n South So th Africa A conference managed by ACPI www.academic-conferences.org

Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on e-Learning The Cape Peninsula University of Technology Cape Town, South Africa 27-28 June 2013 VOLUME TWO Edited by Dr Eunice Ivala Programme Chair Cape Peninsula University of Technology Cape Town South Africa

Copyright The Authors, 2013. All Rights Reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission may be made without written permission from the individual authors. Papers have been double-blind peer reviewed before final submission to the conference. Initially, paper abstracts were read and selected by the conference panel for submission as possible papers for the conference. Many thanks to the reviewers who helped ensure the quality of the full papers. These Conference Proceedings have been submitted to Thomson ISI for indexing. Please note that the process of indexing can take up to a year to complete. Further copies of this book and previous yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s proceedings can be purchased from http://academic-bookshop.com E-Book ISBN: 978-1-909507-28-9 E-Book ISSN: 2049-8890 Book version ISBN: 978-1-909507-26-5 Book Version ISSN: 2048-8882 The Electronic version of the Proceedings is available to download at ISSUU.com. You will need to sign up to become an ISSUU user (no cost involved) and follow the link to http://issuu.com Published by Academic Conferences and Publishing International Limited Reading UK 44-118-972-4148 www.academic-publishing.org

Contents Paper Title

Author(s)

Page No.

Preface

Committee

Biographies

Digital Immigrant Students’ Adoption of Online Community of Inquiry: FUTA Case Study

Peter Aborisade, Titi Fola-Adebayo and Funmi Olubode Sawe

Outcomes of Total e-Learning Application in a Tertiary Academic Institution in Nigeria

Babajide Adelekan

E-Learning in Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria Distance Learning Centre: An Evaluation of Opportunities and Challenges

Tinuade Olubunmi Adewale and Cecilia Funmilayo Daramola

Attending to Competency Based Education: New Challenge for e-Learning, Pitfalls and Possibilities

Philip Balcaen

Learner Support in Context of Open Distance and e-Learning for Adult Students Using new Technologies

Gezani Baloyi

Maintaining Course Contents in Consonance With Students' Perceptions

Omar Abdullah Batarfi

Social Higher Education: How Effective is it?

Vladlena Benson and Stephanie Morgan

Extending Technology Acceptance Model in Mobile Learning Adoption: South African University of Technology Students’ Perspectives

Aaron Bere and Patient Rambe

The Dynamics of Offering ICT Training to Pre-Service and InService Teachers in a South African Context

Moira Bladergroen, Wallace Chigona, Andy Bytheway, Chris Dumas, Sanet Cox and Izak Van Zyl

E-Course Development Based on the Model “System Assembly From Reusable Components”

Jekaterina Bule and Larissa Zaitseva

Using Students Response System via Mobile Devices in Large Introductory Psychology Classes

Kevin Chan, Ian Brown, Indie Chor Bun Chung, Lu Hui-Jing and Green Wai-To Luk

Applying System Theory to Develop a Mobile Learning Pedagogical Framework

Pieter Conradie

Cloud Technologies in Technical Education: A Case Study

Eduardo Correia and Ricky Watson

Leapfrogging Pedagogy: A Design Approach to Transforming Learning in Challenging Contexts

Susan Crichton

Fifteen Years of Research on Computers and Education from South Africa

Johannes Cronjé

105

Cultivating Learning Design Thinking With e-Portfolios in a Masters Course

Andrew Deacon and Cheryl HodgkinsonWilliams

116

Could Institutional Virtual Learning Environments be Stifling the Possibilities of Learning?

Jerome Terpase Dooga

125

Enhancing the Postgraduate Experience of Assessment and Feedback in a Learning Community

Martina Doolan

136

Paper Title

Author(s)

Page No.

Opportunities and Challenges: Combining Distance and OnCampus Students in Concurrent Courses

Ralph Ellis, Duzgun Agdas and Xi Zheng

143

Stories of Resistance: Digital Counterstories Among South African Pre-Service Student Educators

Daniela Gachago, Franci Cronje, Eunice Ivala, Janet Condy and Agnes Chigona

149

Project-Based Assessment Influencing Pass Rates of an ICT Module at an ODL Institution

Leila Goosen and Dalize van Heerden

157

An Inter-Independence Collaborative Strategy for Sustainable Transnational Higher Education in the Info-Global Age: A new Science of e-Learning in the Making

Mohamed Ziad Hamdan

165

ICT in Practice at the Durban University of Technology

Anita Hiralaal

176

A new Concept of Study Materials for Machine Design

Martin Hynek, Miroslav Grach, Petr Votapek and Jitka Bezdekova

185

Computer Anxiety, Computer Self-Efficacy and Attitude Towards Internet Among Secondary School Students in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria

Akpan Iniobong, Patrick Uko and Theresa Ekanem

193

Online-Offline System of Evaluating Teaching and Courses for Professional Development

Eunice Ivala

199

A Lecturerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Perception of the Adoption of the Inverted Classroom or Flipped Method of Curriculum Delivery in a Hydrology Course, in a Resource Poor University of Technology

Eunice Ivala, Anton Thiart and Daniela Gachago

207

The TPACK-in-Practice Workshop Approach: A Shift From Learning the Tool to Learning About Technology-Enhanced Teaching

Kamini Jaipal Jamani and Candace Figg

215

Lessons Learnt: Building a Foundation for e-Learning in Medical Education in Botswana

Masego Kebaetse, Cecil Haverkamp and Oathokwa Nkomazana

224

Awareness Learning is a Function of Educational Technology in e-Learning

Simon Bheki Khoz

231

Mobile Learning: A Kaleidoscope

Marlena Kruger and Riana Bester

239

Using Facebook to Teach Communication and Academic Literacy Skills: Perceptions of University Students in Botswana

Joel Magogwe and Beauty Ntereke

248

Investigating Factors That Influence the Socially Orientated Instructional Technology Adoption Rate in an Open Distance Learning Institution

Peter Mkhize and Magda Huisman

255

Exploring Onscreen Marking for Expediting Formative Assessment Feedback in an ODL Environment

Jabu Mtsweni and Hanifa Abdullah

264

Cyber Safety Education: Towards a Cyber-Safety Awareness Framework for Primary Schools

Thirumala Naidoo, Elmarie Kritzinger and Marianne Loock

272

M-Learning With WhatsApp: A Conversation Analysis

Abulela Ngaleka and Walter Uys

282

Empowering Educators to Teach Using Emerging Technologies in Higher Education: A Case of Facilitating a Course Across Institutional Boundaries

Dick Ngâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ambi, Vivienne Bozalek and Daniela Gachago

292

Explaining Influences in the Adoption of Blackboard at an Institution of Higher Learning

Vuyisile Nkonki, Siyanda Ntlabathi and Luvuyo Mkonqo

301

Students as Creative Producers

Travis Noakes, Laura Czerniewicz and Cheryl Brown

309

Paper Title

Author(s)

Page No.

Age, Gender, and Computer Self-Efficacy as Correlates of Social Media Usage for Scholarly Works in Nigeria

Maruff Akinwale Oladejo, Olajide Olawole Adelua and Nelson Aderemi Ige

316

Utilizing Online Exams and Human Resources to Improve Student Learning and Minimizing Academic Dishonesty - Finds From Large Section Deployment

Timothy Olson

321

JiFUNzeni: A Blended Learning Approach for Sustainable Teachers’ Professional Development

Brown Onguko

326

Learning Analytics: Online Supports Requirements of Learners Revealed

Shireen Panchoo and Alain Jaillet

337

Optimising the use of Online Technology for Learning and Teaching Science

Joy Penman and Jyothi Thalluri

344

Using Social Embeddedness to Explore Ubiquitous Learning in Mobile Environments at a South African University of Technology

Patient Rambe and Aaron Bere

353

Promoting and Supporting Innovations in e-Learning in a Traditional Environment

Brenda Ravenscroft

363

Enlightening Mobile Computer Aided Learning Assessment Tool

Ahmed Salem

370

Effective use of Social Networks to Enhance Engagement and Interaction in Microbiology

Sibongile Simelane and Dorothea Mathudi Dimpe

378

Dooyeweerd is Watching you: Using Instant Messaging to Prepare for Assessment

Imelda Smit and Roelien Goede

386

Academic Staff’s Challenges in Adopting Blended Learning: Reality at a Developing University

Mswazi Tshabalala, Charity NdeyaNdereya and Tiana Van der Merwe

396

Globalisation and e-Learning: Integrating University and Professional Qualifications for Employability and Lifelong Learning

James Uhomoibhi and Margaret Ross

404

An Open and Interactive Multimedia e-Learning Module for Graphing Kinematics

Carlton Watson and Vernal Brathwaite

409

Enhancing Creative Problem Solving in the Higher Education Curriculum Through the use of Innovative e-Learning Technologies

Denise Wood and Carolyn Bilsborow

416

To Scratch or not to Scratch – a Reflection

Malie Zeeman

425

PHD papers

435

Perspectives on the Integration of Facebook Into Higher Education

Lillian Buus

437

Factors Influencing the Acceptance of Web 2.0 Technologies in the Learning Environment of Nigeria: A Conceptual Framework

Razep Echeng, Abel Usoro and Grzegorz Majewski

444

The Management Practices of ICT Integration in the Curriculum of Primary Schools in Uganda

Stephen Kyakulumbye and Isaac Wasswa Katono

453

Exploring an Empowerment Strategy for Blackboard in a Higher Education Institution

Sibongile Simelane and Sibongile Ruth Ngcapu

462

Masters Research Papers

471

Lecturer Perceptions on the use of Social Networking Services in Education iii

Ricardo da Rocha and Antoinette Lombard

473

Paper Title

Author(s)

Page No.

Greek Secondary School Teachers' Perceptions Regarding ICT and Greek Literature/Language

Olga Despi

479

E-Learning Tools for Public Awareness Programme Education in Disaster Risk Management: Case Study of the City of Cape Town Disaster Risk Management Centre

Martha Kabaka and Juliet Stoltenkamp

488

From Cellphone to Computer: University Students’ use of Technology in First Year

Caroline Magunje and Cheryl Brown

496

Work In Progress Papers

503

WebSci@UHI: Teaching Web Science in a Web Science Fashion

Erik Cambria, Ian Barnes, Elizabeth 3 Brooks and Chris Eckl

505

Foundations for the Reconceptualization of the e-Textbook

David Lamas, Terje Välyataga, Mart Laanpere, Veronika Rogalevich, Arman Arakelyan, Sónia Sousa and Ilya Shmorgun

510

E-Learning of Highway Traffic Flow in Real Time

Ren Moses

515

An Exploration of e-Learning Practices of Teachers at Selected Schools

Osman Sadeck

519

Knowcations: A Meme-Based Personal Knowledge Management System-in-Progress

Ulrich Schmitt

523

Leveraging Engagement and Participation in e-Learning with Trust

Sonia Sousa and David Lamas

528

Facilitating a Constructivist Learning Environment Through Chat Room Dialogue

Kristian Stewart

532

Late Submission

537

Does Assessing E-Skills Competence at an Open Distance Learning, Higher Education Institution Matter? – A Case in Point

Jabulisiwe Mabila, Sam Ssemugabi and Helene Gelderblom

539

Preface This book represents the Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on e-Learning. The conference this year is being hosted by the Cape Peninsula University of Technology in Cape Town, South Africa. It is my pleasure to have the role of Programme Chair, with Professor Christine Winberg from the Fundani Centre for Higher Education at Cape Peninsula University of Technology, as Conference Chair. The opening keynote address is given by Professor Laura Czerniewicz from the OpenUCT Initiative, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa and Laura will address the topic “Disaggregation in Teaching and Learning in Higher Education”. The second day will be opened by Professor Andrew J Bytheway from the Cape Peninsula University of Technology, who will talk about “Managing ICTs in Education – a South African perspective”. ICEL is a well-established platform for bringing together a wide range of stakeholders involved with the challenges of e-Learning in a rapidly changing global society, including academics, innovators and practitioners interested in benefitting from, using and contributing to current research, as well as professionals working in the private and public sector. The conference provides a forum for rigorous and stimulating sharing of ideas about e-Learning today. It is an opportunity for the broader e-Learning community to meet and for overlapping communities of practitioners to join the lively e-Learning conversations. The range of papers will ensure an interesting two days. With an initial submission of 208 abstracts, and after the double blind peer review process, there are 69 papers published in these Conference Proceedings. These papers represent research from more than 20 countries including: Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Botswana, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Ghana, Greece, Hong Kong, Iran, Latvia, Malaysia, Mauritius, New Zealand, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, UK and USA. I hope that you have a stimulating and enjoyable conference. Dr Eunice Ivala Programme Chair Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape Town June 2013

Conference Executive

Christine Winberg, Cape Peninsula University of Techonolgy, South Africa Eunice Ivala, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa Jolanda Morkel, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa Agnes Chigona, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa Daniela Gachago, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa

Mini Track Chairs

Khalid Alshahrani, King Fahad Naval Academy, Saudi Arabia Eunice Ivala, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa Maruff Akinwale Oladejo, University of Lagos, Nigeria Susan Crichton, University of British Columbia, Canada Khitam Shraim, Ministry of Education, Palestine Christina Dinsmore, Southampton Solent University (SSU), Southampton, UK

Conference Committee Members

The conference programme committee consists of key people in the e-learning community around the world. The following people have confirmed their participation: If you are interested in joining the committee for this conference, please click the conference committee button on the right of this page. Mohd Helmy Abd Wahab (Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Malaysia); Dr Peter Aborisade (The Federal University of Technology Akure, Nigeria); Dr. Bulent Acma (Anadola University, Eskisehir, Turkey); Dr Chigona Agnes (Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa); Dr Ali Alawneh(Philadelphia University, Jordan); Prof Saleh Alhalalat (King Saud University, Saudi Arabia); Lisa Allen (The University of British Columbia, Canada); NajiAlQbailat (Al-Balqa' Applied University, PAUC, Jordan); Nabeel Al-Qirim (UAE University, United Arab Emirates); Dr Zahra Rashid Said AlRawahi (Sultan Qaboos University, Oman); Kalid Alshahrani (King Fahad Naval Academy , Saudi Arabia); Professor Abdullah Al-Zoubi (Princess Sumaya University for Technology, Amman, Jordan); Dr. Anca-Olga Andronic (Spiru Haret University, Romania); Dr. Razvan-Lucian Andronic (Spiru Haret University,Romania);Dr Ezendu Ariwa (London Metropolitan University, London, UK); Peter Arthur (University of British Columbia Okanagan, Kelowna, British Columbia , Canada); Dr William Ashraf (University of Sussex, UK); Dr Kallol Bagchi (University of Texas at El Paso, USA); Prof. Philip Leon Balcaen (University Of British Columbia, Kelowna, Canada); Karen Barnstable (UBC Okanagan, Canada); Dr Tshepo Batane (University of Botswana, Botswana); Dr Gary Bell(London South Bank University, UK); Younes Benslimane (York University, Toronto, Canada); Jennifer Bergh (Eiffel-Corp - (Blackboard partners and resellers), South Africa); Prof Sonia Berman (University of Cape Town, South Africa); Prosper Bernard (University of Quebec, Canada); Dr. Igor Bernik(University of Maribor, Slovenia); Professor Dr Amine Berqia (University of Algarve, Portugal); Karen Bjerg Petersen (University of Aarhus, Denmark); Dr Patrick Blum (inside Business Group, Aachen, Germany); Dr. Mads Bo-Kristensen (Resource Center for Integration, Vejle, Denmark); David Bond(University of Technology, Sydney, Australia); Professor Luis Borges Gouveia (University Fernando Pessoa, Portugal); Lynn Bosetti (University of British Columbia Okanagan, Kelowna, British Columbia , Canada); Sheryl Buckley (Unisa, South Africa); Dr Acma Bulent (Anadolu University, Eskisehir, Turkey); Pasquina Campanella (University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Italy); Assistant Professor Dr Phaik Kin Cheah (Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR), Malaysia);Dr Adeline Chia (Taylor's University, Malaysia); Satyadhyan Chickerur (M S Ramaiah Institute of Technology, India); Chinnapaka Chitharanjandas ( Bang college of business, Republic of Kazakhstan); Dr Mohammad Chizari (Tarbiat Modarres University, Iran); Chee-Keong Chong (Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR), Malaysia); Hal Christensen (Christensen/Roberts Solutions, Forest Hill, NY, USA); Dr. Jaesam Chung (Ewha W. University, Rep. of Korea); Prof. Delaine Cochran (Indiana University, USA); Dr Glenn Cockerline (Brandon University, Canada); David Comiskey (University of Ulster, Ireland); Dr Caroline Crawford (University of Houston-Clear Lake, USA); Susan Crichton (University of British Columbia , Canada); Johannes Cronje(Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa); Prof. Laura Czerniewicz (University of Cape Town, South Africa); Ramiza Darmi (Universiti Putra Malaysia, Australia); Annemarie Davis (University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa); Dr. Pieter De Vries (Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands); Prof Rhena Delport (University of Pretoria, South Africa); Jack Dempsey (Univ. of South Alabama, USA); Christina Dinsmore (Southampton Solent University, UK); Jerome Terpase Dooga (University of Jos, Nigeria); Dr Martina A. Doolan (University of Hertfordshire, UK); Dr Laurent Dukan (PHD International, France); Dr Bulent Gursel Emiroglu (Eskisehir Yolu Baglica Mevkii, Turkey); Howe Emmanuel (Institute of Development Management (IDM), Swaziland); Dr Judith Enriquez (University of North Texas, USA); Prof. Dr. Alptekin Erkollar (ETCOP, Austria); Prof. Jean-Louis Ermine (Telecom Business School, Evry Cedex, France); Nima Fallah (BETA Strasbourg University, France,); Stephen Farrier (University of Edinburgh, UK); Dr Omid Fatemi (University of Tehran, Iran); Prof Corona Felice (Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, University of Salerno, Italy); Dr Aikyna Finch (Strayer University, Huntsville, USA); Dr Titi Fola-Adebayo (Fed Univ of Tech, Nigeria); Prof Joseph Fong (City University of vi

Hong Kong, China); Marga Franco-Casamitjana(Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Spain); Daniel Gachago (Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa); Fenella Galpin (Open University, UK);Dr Grisel Garcia Perez (UBC Okanagan, Canada); Prof. Henrique Gil (School of Education -Polytechnic Institution of Castelo Branco, Portugal); Dr Judy Gnarpe (University of Alberta, Canada); Dr Andrew Goh (International Management Journals, Singapore); Gerald Goh (Multimedia University, Melaka, Malaysia); Dr. Andrea Gorra (Leeds Metropolitan University, UK); Jivesh Govil (Cisco Systems Inc, USA); Dr Sue Greener (University of Brighton, UK); David Guralnick (University of Columbia, New York and Kaleidescope Learning, USA); Dr Rajaram Gurusamy (DMI ST. John the Baptist University, Malawi);Dr Rugayah Gy Hashim (Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM), Malaysia); Zuwati Hasim (University of Malaya, Malaysia); Thanos Hatziapostolou(International faculty of the university of sheffield, Greece); Dr. Stylianos Hatzipanagos (King’s College London, UK); Alan Hilliard (University of Hertfordshire, UK); Dr Eun Hwang (Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA); Avi Hyman (University of Toronto, Canada); Dr. Amr Ibrahim (American University of Cairo, Egypt); Professor Rozhan Idrus (Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia); Dr Michael Ievers (Stranmillis University College, N. Ireland, UK); Issham Ismail (Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia); Dr Marina Ismail (Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia); Rubeina Ismail-Allie(Tshwane University of Technology, Gauteng, South Africa); Dr Eunice Ndeto Ivala (Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa); Sheila Jagannathan (World Bank Institute, Washington, USA); Prof Dinesh Chandra Jain (SVITS, India); Dr Jill Jameson (University of Greenwich , UK); KanthiJayasundera (Center for Online and Distance Education, Simon Fraser University,Canada ); Amor Jebali (University of Manouba, Tunisia); Runa Jesmin(Global Heart Forum, UK); Phillip Jones (Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong); Prof Konstantinos Kalemis (National Centre for Local Government and Public Administration, Greece); Dr Michail Kalogiannakis (University of Crete, Faculty of Education, Crete); Pankaj Kamthan (Concordia University, Montreal, Canada); Dr. Haijun Kang (Kansas State University, United States); Saba Khalil Toor (T.E.C.H Society, Pakistan); Dr Mohammad Ayoub Khan(C-DAC, India); Adrian Kirkwood (Open University, UK); Brant Knutzen (University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong); Dr Marlena Kruger (University of Johannesburg, South Africa); Dr Yu-Ju Kuo (Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA); Prof Reggie Kwan (Caritas Institute of Higher Education, Hong Kong, China); Dr Hok Yin Jean Lai (Hong Kong Baptist University , Hong Kong); Kamaljit Lakhtaria (Atmiya Institute of Technology & Science, India); Paul Lam(Centre for Learning Enhancement And Research, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, China); Dr Maria Lambrou (University of the Aegean, Greece); Dr Mona Laroussi (Institut National des Sciences Appliquées et de la Technologie, Tunisia); Debora Larson (Kaleidoscope Learning, New York, USA); JnoBaptiste Laurelle (OISE/ University of Toronto, Canada); Kenneth Lee (Delaware Valley College, Pennsylvania, USA); Stella Lee (Athabasca University, Canada); Victor Lee (School of Continuing and Professional Studies, The Chinese University of Hong Kong , China); Christine Levy (Kaleidoscope Learning, New York, USA); Dr Rita Yi Man Li (Hong Kong Shue Yan University, Hong Kong); Dr. Ken Li (Hong Kong Institute of Vocational Education, HKSAR, China);Dr Ying Liu (Cambridge University, Uk); Jenny Lorimer (University of Hertfordshire, UK); Dr Pam Lowry (Lawrence Technological University, USA); Prof Sam Lubbe (University of South Africa, South Africa); Dr Grace Lynch (University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia); Professor Lachlan MacKinnon (University of Greenwich, UK); Maria Madiope (University of South Africa, South Africa); Dr. Chittaranjan Mandal (School of IT,IIT Kharagpur, India); Robert Manderson (University of Roehampton, United Kingdom); Phebe Mann (University of Reading, UK); Jorge Martins (Information School, University of Sheffield, United Kingdom); Prof Hassan Mathkour (King Saud University, Saudi Arabia); Dr Jeton McClinton (Jackson State University, USA);Dr Cherifa Mehadji (University of Strasbourg, France); DR Sabita Menon (University of West of England, UK); Mandia Mentis (Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand); Dr Cecilia Mercado (Saint Louis University, USA); Bente Meyer (The Danish University of Education, Denmark); SunilkumarMistry (Johnson Group, Ahmedabad, India); Ali Moeini (University of Tehran, Iran); Sahel Mohammad Esa (Kabul Education University, Afghanistan); Dr Gholam Ali Montazert (Tarbiat Modares University, Iran); Dr Jane Moore (Liverpool Hope University, UK); Jolanda Morkel (Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa); Markus Mostert (Rhodes University, South Africa); Molefe Motshegwe (University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana); DilawerMowzer (College of Cape Town, South Africa); Manabu Murakami (Tokyo University of Science, Japan); Dr Minoru Nakayama (Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan); Dr Vincent Ng (The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, China); Dr. Dick Ng'ambi (University of Cape Town, South Africa); Grace O’Malley (National College of Ireland, Ireland); Ass.Prof. Birgit Oberer (Kadir Has University, Turkey); Dr Maruff Akinwale Oladejo (University of Lagos, Nigeria); Francisca Onaolapo Oladipo (Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria); Dr Roxana Ologeanu (Universite Montpellier 2, France); Smart Odunayo Olugbeko (Adeyemi College Of Education, Ondo, Nigeria); Assoc. Prof. Abdelnaser Omran (Universiti Sains Malaysia, Malaysia); Dr Jacinta Agbarachi Opara.In (School of Science, Federal College of Education(Technical),Omoku, Nigeria); Dr Addin Osman (Najran University, Saudi Arabia); Maria Osuna Alarcón (Salamanca University, Spain); Mourad Ouziri (University of Paris 5, France); Dr Ecaterina Pacurar Giacomini (Louis Pasteur University, France); William Painter (NCC Education Ltd, UK); Prof Bamidis Panagiotis (Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece); Dr Shireen Panchoo (University of Technology, Mauritius, Mauritius); Dr Arna Peretz (Ben Gurion Univeristy of the Negev, Israel); Dr. Beth Perry (Athabasca University, Canada); Dr Donatella Persico (National Research Council, Institute of Educational Technology, Italy); Professor Selwyn Piramuthu (University of Florida, Gainesville, USA); Dr Michel Plaisant (University of Quebec in Montreal, Canada); Paul Prinsloo (University of South Africa (Unisa), South Africa); Zahra Punja (University of Toronto , Canada); Anne Quinney (Bournemouth University, UK); Dr Ronald Robberecht (University of vii

Idaho, Moscow, USA); Dr Melissa Saadoun (MS Institute , Paris, France); Osman Sadeck (Cape Education Department, South Africa); Dr Balasundaram Sadhu Ramakrishnan(National Institute of Technology, India); Dr Florin Salajan (North Dakota State University , Canada); Gustavo Santos (University of Porto, Portugal); Prof. Chaudhary Imran Sarwar (Mixed Reality University, Pakistan, Pakistan); Dr Nima Shahidi (Islamic Azad University - Nourabad Mamasani Branch, Iran); Dr Khitam Shraim (Birzeit University, Ramallah, Palestine); Sibongile Simelane (Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria, South Africa); Dr Keith Smyth(Napier University, Edinburgh, UK); Dr Yeong-Tae Song (Towson University, Maryland, USA); Dr Elsebeth Sorensen (Aarhus University, Denmark); Dr Mark Stansfield (University of West of Scotland, UK); Juliet Stoltenkamp (University of Western Cape, South Africa); Dr Roxana Taddei (UniversitĂŠ Clermont Ferrand 2, Montpellier, France); Yana Tainsh (University of Greenwich , UK); Dr Ken Takeuchi (Tokyo University of Science, Japan); Dr John Thompson(Buffalo State College , USA); Prof. Ramayah Thurasamy (University Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia); Professor Christopher Turner (University of Winchester , UK); Karin Tweddell Levinsen (Aalborg University, Denmark); Dr Sapna Tyagi (Institute of Management Studies(IMS), India); Duan Van der Westhuizen (University of Johannesburg, South Africa); Dalize van Heerden (Unisa, Pretoria, South Africa); Linda van Ryneveld (Tshwane University of technology South Africa, South Africa); Prof. Dr. Asaf Varol (Firat University, Turkey); Paduri Veerabhadram (Vaal University of Technology, South Africa);Dr Steven Verjans (Open Universiteit of The Netherlands, The Netherlands); Maggy Minhong Wang (The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong); Dr Anita Welch (North Dakota State University, USA); Robert Wierzbicki (University of Applied Sciences Mittweida, Germany); Roy Williams (University of Portsmouth, UK); Shirley Williams (University of Reading, UK); Prof Christine Winberg (Fundani Centre for Higher Education, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa); Dr. Noeline Wright (University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand); Daniel Yakmut (Federal University , Nigeria); Dr Ruth Yeung(Institute for Tourism Studies, China); Aw Yoke Cheng (Asia Pacific University of Technology and Innovation (A.P.U), Malaysia); Dr Nabil Zary (Karolinska Institutet, Sweden); Mingming Zhou (Nanyang Technological University, Singapore); Gwen Zilm (University of British Columbia Okanagan, Kelowna, British Columbia , Canada); Dr Mitra Zolfaghari (Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Iran)

viii

Biographies Conference Chair Professor Christine Winberg is the Director of the Fundani Centre for Higher Education Development at the Cape Peninsula University of Technology in Cape Town, South Africa. The Fundani Centre is responsible for enhancing teaching, learning, and educational research at the institution. Her work involves academic development, policy work, and programme evaluation. She is also the project leader of the Work-integrated Learning Research Unit, which is supported by the South African National Research Foundation. Her research focus is professional and vocational education and technical communication. Previously she lectured in applied linguistics and language education in South Africa and in Sweden. She is chairperson of the South African Association for Applied Linguistics.

Programme Chair Dr Eunice Ivala is the coordinator of the Educational Technology Unit, Fundani Centre for Higher Education and Development, at the Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT). The Educational Technology Unit is responsible for promoting appropriate use of technologies in teaching and learning at the institution. Her Research focus is in ICT –mediated teaching and learning in developing contexts. She is a team member in a national project on emerging technologies (ET) and their use in South African Higher Education Institutions to improve teaching and learning in the sector and a digital storytelling project in teacher Education, which are supported by the South African National Research Foundation. Previously a project manager at the Media in Education Trust Africa, an educational specialist at the South African Institute for Distance Education and a lecture at the University of KwaZulu Natal.

Keynote Speakers Professor Andy Bytheway. Following a career in the systems and software industry, Andy Bytheway took up an academic post at the Cranfield School of Management in the UK, first as Lecturer and then as Research Fellow. There he pioneered commercially-funded Information Systems research and he taught on the Cranfield MBA programmes in the UK and Singapore. He emigrated to South Africa in 1998, where he took up the Old Mutual Chair in Information Systems at the University of the Western Cape His specific interest in the management of information technology in education arose from a two-year research partnership with the Cape Technikon, which investigated the role of information technology in Higher Education. On his retirement he continued to work at CPUT as Adjunct Professor of Information Management, supervising masters and doctoral research and assisting with funded research projects Associate Professor Laura Czerniewicz heads UCT's open scholarship initiative OpenUCT, and was the founding director of University of Cape Town's Centre for Educational Technology. She has research interests in students' and academics' digitally-mediated practices, open scholarship and the role of ICTs in higher education. She has worked in educational technology, research and publishing in South Africa and Zimbabwe.

Mini Track Chairs Khalid Alshahraniis a lecturer at King Fahad Naval Academy in Saudi Arabia. His research interest includes understanding eLearning in Higher Education from sociocultural perspectives adopting Activity Theory as a theoretical perspective. He is also interested in how eLearning and Distance Learning programs can enhance teaching and learning especially English as a Foreign Language (EFL).

Dr Maruff Akinwale Oladejo is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Educational Foundations, Federal College of Education (Special), Nigeria. He is an expert in Educational Planning and Policy. His research interest is in the Efficiency of Open-Distance Learning. He is currently collaborating in a bilateral research work on ‘Clinicians’ awareness, accessibility and utilization of e-learning and continuous education programme in blood transfusion. He served on the ECEL 2012 Conference Committee, and also currently serving on ICEL 2013 Conference Committee. He is a reviewer to several international referred ix

journals. Dr Susan Crichton has taught in rural and urban K-12 schools. She is a visiting professor with Aga Khan University – Institute of Educational Development, Dar es Salaam,Tanzania and a Fellow of the Commonwealth Centre of Education, Cambridge. Dr. Crichton has worked on development projects in rural western China, and as a consultant with academics in Bhutan and Chile. She is an online mentor for the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) project inAfghanistan. Her research explores innovative uses of technology to foster creativity and imagination. She works with colleagues in challenging contexts exploring ways appropriate technologies can provide access to professional development and learning. Dr Khitam Shraim is an assistant professor of Educational Technology. Currently, she is working as the Head of Planning Center in the Ministry of Education, Palestine. Khitam is one of the Founding Directors of the Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching and the e-Learning Unit at An-Najah National University, Palestine. My research interests revolve around promoting creative learning and innovative teaching in higher education, particularly in the area of technology-enhanced educational change. She has published many papers and presented workshops and seminars in many national and international conferences. Two of her research papers won the best research paper award. Christina Dinsmore (MProf) is a Senior Lecturer (Strategy) at Southampton Business School (SBS) within Southampton Solent University (SSU). She is Course Leader for their BA (Hons) Business Management course, as well as the suite of blended learning Business courses currently running at SSU. Christina was a project member of the Discipline focused Learning Technology Enhancement Academy project ‘Working with e-champions to enhance flexible learning’ which was supported by the UK Higher Education Academy. Currently studying her EdD, she still finds time for SSU’s Blended Learning Action Support Team, the Blended Learning Research Cluster and the Employability Nexus Working Group.

Biographies of Presenting Authors Peter Aborisade lectures EAP at the Federal University of Technology Akure, Nigeria. His area of engagement is integration of learning technologies into the curriculum; he is heading a Blended Learning Research Group working on the Moodle as a university wide VLE platform. He has presented research findings in Blended Learning in the UK, Canada and Africa. Dr Babajide Adelekan is a Chief lecturer in Agricultural Engineering at Federal College of Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria. He has authored many papers in renewable energy, which is his main research area. As Chairman of the Research and Development committee he has actively participated in the E-learning adoption process in the College. Makinde Aderemi trained up to the level of a Master Degree holder specializing as an art teacher in one of Nigeria’s earliest teacher education institute, Adeyemi College of Education, Ondo. He is presently a graduate student of Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomoso, Nigeria. Tinuade Olubunmi Adewale is a Principal Librarian in Hezekiah Oluwasanmi Library of Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria. She holds B.ED in Guidance and Counseling in English and Masters Degree in Library Science (MLS) from University of Ibadan, Nigeria. Her field of specialization is Grassroot Librarianship; Librarianship and Education and, Librarianship and Gender Studies Kolawole Akinjide Aramide is a Research Fellow at the Abadina Media Resource Centre, Faculty of Education, and University of Ibadan, Nigeria. He holds a Master degree in Information Science from the University of Ibadan and is currently doing doctoral research at the same University. His research areas are ICT use in teaching and learning, and library automation, among others. Philip Balcaen is an Associate Professor at in Education at The University of British Columbia in Canada. His general research focus is the pedagogy of critical thinking in mathematics and science education. His educational technology interests include embedding critical thinking pedagogy within elearning environments with an emerging interest in apps development involving teaching “tools for thought.”

Gezani Baloyi taught at several secondary and primary schools in the Mopani District, Limpopo Province. He has nearly 21 years of teaching experience. While working as a teacher, he attended teacher education conferences and workshops. He also presented papers at national and international conferences in teacher education. Taofik Bello is a Librarian at the Nimbe Adedipe Library, Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, Ogun state. His area of specialization includes cataloguing, classification and reference service. Dr Vladlena Benson is a course director of the MA Management programme at Kingston Business School, and a Senior Lecturer at the Department of Informatics and Operations Management. Vladlena's research interests are in the are of social networking and information security, while her research is recognised by the British Academy of Management ( BAM) and Association of MBA's. Aaron Bere is a Lecturer and an Academic Researcher in the School of ICT at the Central University of Technology, Bloemfontein South Africa. Prior to this, he lectured at various private institutions; he also worked as an Information Processing Offer for Zimbabwean Home Affairs. His research objective is to enhance Higher Education teaching and learning through Mobile Learning. Riana Bester is presently an Educational Advisor (Blended Learning) at CTI Education Group, Johannesburg. She is involved in research as well as professional development of lecturers; with a special interest is the empowerment of “mature” technology users. She is finalizing her M.Ed studies under Professor Geoffrey Lautenbach at the Faculty of Education of the University of Johannesburg. Jitka Bezdekova is a MSc student of Machine Design at the University of West Bohemia. Her dissertation is concerned with the design of a hydraulic press. She is also an employee of the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, where she participates in the enhancement of teaching process. Moira Bladergroen graduated from the University of the Western Cape (PhD, 1999). She is now working as Research Coordinator and Post-Doctoral Fellow in the Department of Information Systems at the University of Cape Town. She is a qualified Medical Technologist (Specialized in Hematology) and qualified Pastoral Care and Councilor (MTh from the University of Stellenbosch). Dr Cheryl Brown is a Senior Lecturer in the Centre for Educational Technology at the University of Cape Town. She completed her PhD in Information Systems in 2011 focusing on what technology means to students and how this influences the way they use technology at university. Her research focuses on digital literacy and identity particularly amongst first year university students. Jekaterina Bule is lecturer at Riga Technical University, Riga, Latvia. She received her Ph.D. in Computer Science in 2011 with the thesis “Student model-based adaptive e-learning methods”. Her main scientific interests are Computer-Based Teaching and Learning Systems (CBTLS); Distance Learning; Adaptation Methods in CBTLS; Models in CBTLS; Modern Technologies in CBTLS. Lillian Buus is a part-time PhD Candidate in E-learning Lab and head of the E-learning Unit, Aalborg University. In my research I am looking at the learning potentials within the use of Web 2.0 and based on that developing a learning methodology. Kevin Chan is a Research Assistant Professor at the Department of Applied Social Sciences, Hong Kong Polytechnic University. His research foci include personal and academic development in the adolescence and emerging adulthood context, community psychology, and mobile learning in the higher education setting. Patricia Rudo Chikuni is a PhD student at University of Cape Town, Department of Information Systems. She is currently a lecturer at the National University of Science and Technology in Zimbabwe. She has a Masters in Archives & Records Management from the University of Botswana and a BSc Hons Library and Information Science. Gil Cleeton is contributing faculty at Walden University. He was Senior Research Fellow in the Department of Communication and Neuroscience at Keele University in England, developing electronic signal processors for cochlear implants in Europe and America. Lorraine Cleeton has been teaching and conducting research in education for over 30 years. She is contributing faculty at Walden University and mentors Ph.D and Ed.D.students. Her research interests are in learning barriers in online learning,

cognitive style, problem solving and external representations, working memory, dyslexia and dyscalculia and assistive technology. Dr. Pieter Conradie is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) at the Vaal University of Technology, focusing on the use of ICT in education, specifically mobile devices. Eduardo Correia is a senior lecturer in the Department of Computing at the Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology, New Zealand. His particular interest is virtualisation technologies, including VMware, Microsoft Hyper-V on Windows Server 2008 R2 and Windows Server 2012. He and colleague, Ricky Watson, have designed and built TechLabs, a teaching network based on virtualization. Dr Susan Crichton has taught in rural and urban K-12 schools. She is a visiting professor with Aga Khan University – Institute of Educational Development, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and a Fellow of the Commonwealth Centre of Education, Cambridge and has worked on development projects in rural western China. Her research explores innovative uses of technology to foster creativity and imagination. Franci Cronje is an academic entrepreneur with a PhD in Media Studies obtained from the University of Cape Town. She is also a filmmaker and artist. Passionate about Critical Studies, multimodal discourse, Border Crossing Theory with a focus on adolescent cultural identities and the academic argument, she specializes in visual culture as popular communication. Johannes Cronje is the dean of the Faculty of Informatics and Design at the Cape Peninsula University of Technology. Before that he was a professor in computers and education at the University of Pretoria for 14 years. He has supervised or cosupervised about 100 Masters and 45 Doctoral students and has more than 30 publications Cecilia Funmilayo Daramola is a Librarian at the Federal University of Technology, Akure, Ondo State Nigeria, graduated from University of Ile-Ife now Obafemi Awolowo University holds B. Education/Religious studies and MLS from University of Ibadan, Nigeria. Her research interest is in resource Management, Continuous Education in Librarianship and users services. Andrew Deacon is an educational technologist and learning designer at the University of Cape Town’s Centre for Educational Technology where he works on learning analytics projects, teaches learning design courses and develops online learning activities. He has an MSc in Computer Science and 14 years of experience in educational technology. Olga Despi is currently working as a Modern/Ancient Greek language/literature teacher at Pierce-The American School of Greece. She has studied Greek Philology at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens with a specialisation in Linguistics and she did her MA in ICT in Education at King’s College London. Her research interests focus mainly on Greek Education and ICT. Jerome Terpase Dooga is an innovator in technology for teaching at the University where he teaches English. He co-hosted emerge 2012, presented the first seminar in the emerge Africa Network (2012), and papers at eLearning Africa (2009 and 2010). He won an eLearning Fellowship (2008) and the Melon Scholarship for Educational Technology (2010). Dr Martina A. Doolan is a UK National Teaching Fellow and a Principal Lecturer in Computer Science at the University of Hertfordshire in the UK. Martina's research interests include social, collaborative/community learning, assessment-oriented learning and the use of technology. See madoolan.com, interested in working with me I welcome your email m.a.doolan@herts.ac.uk. Razep Echeng is a 2nd year Ph.D. student in computing school at the university of the West of Scotland, having previously held an administrative position as systems analyst and a Network administrator. She holds a B.Sc. in Computer Science an Msc in Advance computer systems Development from the University of the West of Scotland. Ralph Ellis, Ph.D., P.E. is currently an Associate Professor at the University of Florida, Department of Civil and Coastal Engineering, where he teaches Construction Engineering. In his current position he actively engages in performing research on both regional and national projects relating to infrastructure renewal. Dr. Ellis is a registered professional engineer in Florida Daniela Gachago has worked in the field of eLearning since 2002 and is currently based at the Center for Higher Education Development at the Cape Peninsula University of Technology as a lecturer in Educational Technology. Her research interests are in the use of emerging technologies, such as social media, digital stories and clickers in teaching and learning. Roelien Goede is an associate professor at the Vaal Triangle Campus of the North-West University in Vanderbijlpark, South Africa. Her research interests are systems thinking, education of technology based subjects and data warehousing. xii

Leila Goosen (PhD) is an Associate Professor in the School of Computing at the Muckleneuk Campus (Pretoria) of the University of South Africa. Prof. Goosen is the module leader and designer of the College for Science, Engineering and Technology’s fully online signature module currently being rolled out to an estimated 30 000 students in 2013. Miroslav Grach is a PhD student of Machine Design at the University of West Bohemia. The subject of his doctoral study is the Development of new technologies and methods in the field of reverse engineering and retrofitting. He is an employee of the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, where he is involved in the enhancement of teaching process. Kholekile Gwebu is an Associate Professor of Decision Sciences at the University of New Hampshire. His research interests are in e-commerce and decision support systems. His research has appeared in journals such as Decision Support Systems, Journal of Information Systems, Journal of Strategic Information Systems, and Journal of Electronic Commerce Research. Professor Mohamed Ziad Hamdan is Educational Expert at the Arab Bureau of Education for Gulf States, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. He holds a B.A with honors from Damascus University Syria; M.Sc. from Bemidji State University, and Ph.D. from Kent State University Ohio, USA. Ziad Hamdan has forty five years’ university experience in the USA and some Arab countries, and has published widely in Arabic and English Anita Hiralaal is an Accounting lecturer at the School of Education at the Durban University of Technology, the Programme Co-ordinator and Curriculum Champion. She has published an article in the South African Journal of Higher Education on “Students Experiences of Blended Learning” in 2012. She is presently completing a Ph D. Dr Martin Hynek is a Senior Lecturer in the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering at the University of West Bohemia. He is engaged in a number of collaborative projects with industry. He is also the project leader of the teaching enhancement project of the Department of Machine Design. Eunice Ivala is coordinator of the Educational Technology Unit, Fundani Centre for Higher Education and Development, at the Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT). Her research focus is in ICT-mdiated teaching and learning in developing contexts. She is a team member in a national project on emerging technologies and their use in South African Higher Education Institutions to improve teaching and learning. Dr. Kamini Jaipal Jamani is an associate professor of science education at Brock University, Canada. She obtained her B.Ed in Durban, South Africa and her M.Ed and PhD in Canada. Her research focuses on science teaching and learning— how meaning-making occurs from a social semiotics perspective, technology integration in teacher education, and teacher professional development. Iman Janghorban has a BS in Software Engineering. He is interested in Web design and web development. His specialties are in C# language, SQL Server, ASP.NET Frame work, LINQ , Crystal Reports,CSS, JavaScript , JQuery and Photoshop. He is currently employed at the Department of Information & Communication Technology (ICT), Municipality of Isfahan Province, Iran. Martha Kabaka has been working as a researcher assistant since 2010 at the Centre for Innovative Educational and Communication Technologies (CIECT), University of the Western Cape. She holds a BA (Community Dev), Honours (Dev Studies) and has just completed her Master’s in Public Administration). Masego B. Kebaetse, PhD is an Instructional Support Specialist currently working as the Distance Learning Specialist at the University of Botswana School of Medicine. She has been helping faculty and learners use technology for the past 15 years. Additionally, she has been teaching computer literacy, instructional design, and educational technology courses since 1999. Tola Keshinro has a BSc in vocational and technical education from the University of Nigeria. He is senior lecturer and director of the Center for Lagos State Studies, and is currently working with Adeniran Ogunsanya College of Education, Lagos, Nigeria. Simon Bhekimuzi Khoza (PhD) is a Co-ordinator and Lecturer of the Discipline of Curriculum Studies & Educational Technology at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. He coordinates different undergraduate and postgraduate programmes, and teaches and supervises postgraduate research in Curriculum Studies & Educational Technology. He has published in local and international journals. Marlena Kruger is working as Dean of Faculties at the CTI Education Group. She is actively involved with the research project focusing on the provision of e-books on tablet computers to all first year students. She has more than 23 years’ experience in different roles at several South African Universities. She has a doctoral degree in Education. xiii

Stephen Kyakulumbye is an online PhD Candidate in Policy Analysis at Walden University USA, and has MMs Project Planning and Management, PGD Project Planning and Management, Bachelor of Computer Education, Certificate in Education. He is the Assistant Research Coordinator at Uganda Christian University School of Business and Administration. David Lamas currently holds an Interaction Design Professorship at Tallinn University where he heads the Interaction Design Laboratory as well as the international master program on Interactive Media and Knowledge Environments. He also leads and participates in national and international research projects. David also tutors several master and doctoral level students as well as post-doc researchers. Emmanuel Lungile Howe is an Information Technology Consultant. He received his Master's degree in Business Information Systems from Tshwane University of Technology. His academic and research areas are Web 2.0 technologies, mobile and personalised learning in higher education. He is also the Member of the International Association of Computer Science and Information Technology (IACSIT). Jabulisiwe Mabila lectures information systems in the School of Computing at the University of South Africa. Her main area of research is Human-Computer Interaction. She has worked in IT in the banking industry and in government. She holds a P.G.D.E, DipDatametrics, Cert in Business Management (Analysis) and Hons BSc (Information Systems). Caroline Magunje currently works at the Africa University in Mutare, Zimbabwe. She has just completed an MEd dissertation at the University of Cape Town focusing on the role of mobile phones in facilitating learning amongst first year students. Dorothea Mathudi Dimpe is a lecturer at Tshwane University of Technology in the Faculty of Science, Department of Biotechnology and Food Technology. She specialises in Microbiology at undergraduate level. Her interest lies in innovative and interactive technology-enhanced teaching and learning using the emerging technologies such as online learning, clickers, mobile learning and web 2.0. Walter Matli academically holds a four year Cum Laude B-Tech degree in Information Technology (IT) and vice-chancellors academic award from Vaal University of Technology. Research focuses area Education and Information Technology. Rory McGreal is the UNESCO/Commonwealth of Learning Chair in Open Educational Resources (OER) at Athabasca University - Canada's Open University. He is also the director of the Technology Enhanced Knowledge Research Institute (TEKRI). His research interests include OER and mobile learning. Previously, he was Executive Director of Tele-education New Brunswick, a province-wide bilingual (French/English) distance learning network. Luvuyo Mkongo is an eLearning Consultant at the University of Fort Hare in the Teaching and Learning Centre. His primary responsibilities involve supporting academics and students with the use of technology for teaching and learning in the institution. He also provides administration support for the available LMS (Blackboard) across campuses. Portia Mokateko Mathimbi holds a BSc Honours degree in Informatics. She is a Juniour lecturer at the University of South Africa. She is currently studying towards an MSc degree in computing at the University of South Africa. Her topic is Formalisation of information security policies. Dr. Stephanie J Morgan is Associate Dean, Education, in the Faculty of Business & Law, Kingston University, Kingston Hill, UK. She is also a registered Occupational Psychologist. Dr. Ren Moses is a professor of civil engineering at the FAMU-FSU College of Engineering in Tallahassee, Florida, USA. Dr. Moses teaches graduate and undergraduate level courses in highway geometric design, traffic engineering and operations, highway safety analysis, intelligent transportation systems, and advanced traffic flow theory. Dr Jabu Mtsweni is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Computing at University of South Africa. He lectures Honours projects and Database Systems. His research interests are in Internet Computing, focusing on Internet of Services, Web Services, Semantic Services, Cloud Computing, and Mobile technologies. He holds a PhD in Computer Science from UNISA. Kaninda Musumbu is Associate Professor at University Bordeaux, Department of Computer Science, France. Her main research interests are in Artificial intelligence, Static analysis and Systems verification, Formal methods and Modelling, Search Techniques and Heuristics. She received an undergraduate degree in mathematics from UniversitĂŠ Libre de Bruxelles and a PHD from the University of Namur. Mala Naidoo completed her Masters Degree in Information Systems, while teaching Information Technology at Penryn College, Mpumalanga, South Africa. Teachers who attend the Penreach workshops have already experienced her passion for xiv

Computer Literacy, Mathematics and Cyber Awareness. She intends to spread the cyber awareness message to other schools in Mpumalanga. Charity Ndeya-Ndereya is a Senior Lecturer/Researcher in the Centre for Teaching and Learning at the University of the Free State in South Africa. She has a keen research interest in the integration of technology into teaching and learning processes for the benefit of all students including those with disabilities. Dick Ng’ambi is an Associate Professor in the Centre for Educational Technology at the University of Cape Town. He is the leading researcher in low-cost technologies with high educational impact. He holds an MSc in Computer Science from the University of Birmingham, UK, and a PhD in Information Systems from the University of Cape Town. Oathokwa Nkomazana, MD was among the founding faculty of the University of Botswana School of Medicine, which enrolled its first group of medical students in August 2009. She is a College of Ophthalmologists of South Africa certified ophthalmologist, with a Master’s degree in Community Eye Health. Currently, she is the Principal Investigator/Principal Director for three funded projects. Dr Vuyisile Nkonki works for the University of Fort Hare in the Teaching and Learning Centre (TLC) as Manager of the Teaching and Learning Centre, on the Alice campus. His specialty areas are policies governing education, research and development policies, professional development of teachers and lecturers, as well as assessment of students’ learning. Travis Noakes. My PhD in Media Studies explores the e-portfolio design choices that Visual Arts learners make. It draws from my professional expertise in design, internet- and brand management. My ICEL2013 paper on the online creative productions of students results from research assistant work for the Centre for Educational Technology at the University of Cape Town. Siyanda.Ntlabathi is a Teaching and Learning Consultant at the Teaching and Learning Centre of the University of Fort Hare. Her main focus areas are providing support in e-Learning, curriculum development and foundation provisioning. She is currently doing a Masters in ICT in Education (Med). Pius Olatunji Olaojo holds PhD in School Media from the Faculty of Education, University of Ibadan. He is a Research Fellow at the Abadina Media Resource Centre. His research interest areas spans library management, and Library organization, mong others. Gbolahan Olasina is a doctoral student at the University of Kwa-Zulu Natal, South Africa. Mr. Olasina has authored several publications. He is a lecturer at the Department of Library and Information Science, Faculty of Communication and Information Sciences, University of Ilorin, Nigeria currently on study leave. Timothy Olson is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Minnesota in the Information Decision Science Department. Tim has been teaching information system courses successfully using e-textbooks and wiki sites for several years. Tim has published several articles and numerous presentations on e-learning, enterprise system implementation and team building projects. Brown Onguko is Assistant Professor at the Aga University – Institute for Educational Development, East Africa (IED EA). Teaching areas: ICT in Education and Educational Leadership. Research interests: Mobile and Blended Learning. Brown earned his PhD at the University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Brown is currently leading the ICT Research and Innovation Group at IED EA. Dr Shireen Panchoo is head of IT department and lecturer at the University of Technology, Mauritius in the School of Innovative Technologies and Engineering. In 2001 she embarked on e-learning and obtained her PhD in 2010 from the CergyPontoise University, Paris. She is an online tutor and online supervisor for distant learners at Masters Level in France. Patient Rambe (PhD.) is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow in the Department of Computer Science and Informatics and a former Assistant Director of International Academic Projects at the University of the Free State, South Africa. His research interest is the innovative pedagogical use of social media and appropriation of emerging Web-based technologies in resourceconstrained academic environments. Ms Rolda Rapotu is the Provincial Programme Manager for Information Society Development at the Limpopo Economic Development Agency in the Limpopo Province of South Africa. She is responsible for the implementation of INSPIRE programme in Limpopo. This programme was funded by the Government of Finland and piloted in the provinces of Limpopo and the Northern Cape. She has more than five years’ experience in ICT for socio-economic development in disadvantaged communities

Brenda Ravenscroft, Ph.D., In her position as Associate Dean in the Faculty of Arts and Science at Queen’s University, is responsible for teaching and learning initiatives in the faculty, including a large-scale, outcomes-based blended learning project to transform introductory courses, the expansion of online studies through Continuing and Distance Studies, and quality enhancement. Robertson Reid has a B.Sc (Maths, Chemistry) from Rhodes University, B. Tech from Vaal University of Technology, and is currently doing research for M.Tech I.T. He is a Lecturer in Logic, Programming, Web Design and Management. Previously he worked for 25 years in the corporate world as an Industrial Engineer. Dr. Ilse Rootman-le Grange obtained her PhD in Chemical Biology in January 2012 at Stellenbosch University. In 2012 she was appointed as a post-doctoral research fellow at the institution, where she currently is part of the chemistry education research group. Her current research is focused on the use of ICTs in tertiary chemistry education. Dr. Soveacha Ros is an education and training consultant providing sound principles and strategies to the Division of Human Health, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria. He initiates Educational Quality Assurance for Adult Learners model. In Cambodia, he is an adjunct professor at Royal University of Phnom Penh. He gives consultancy to education institutions worldwide. Osman Sadeck is the Chief Education Specialist: e-Learning in the Western Cape Education Department, South Africa. He holds a MEd (e-Learning) from the University of Technology, Sydney, Australia, and is currently a Doctoral student at the Cape Peninsula University of Technology. He has presented papers at numerous national and international conferences. Dr. Ahmed Salem is an Assistant Professor at the faculty of Engineering, King Abdul Aziz University at KAU. He graduated from CMU, PA, USA and he is interested in Active Learning, E-Learning and Excellence in engineering teaching. His contributions include a Design Helping Mechanism for Active Learning Courses that aid in designing learning experiences. Ulrich Schmitt’s career covers IT and management consultancy projects, professorships, and academic management positions in Europe and Southern Africa. He studied Management, Industrial Engineering, Computer Applications, Science and Research Management in Berlin, Cranfield, Basel, and Speyer. Currently, he is setting up an enterprise for Educational Services and Personal Knowledge Management Solutions in Southern Africa (pkm.knowcations.net). Mmafani Serote holds a B-Tech in Commerce Education. She is a Junior Lecturer at the University of South Africa. She is currently a Master’s in Business Information Systems student at Tshwane University of Technology and her topic is Media Richness and Social Presence in an Open Distance Learning Environment. Ngcapu Sibongile is an Instructional Designer at Tshwane University of Technology. She obtained her Master's degree in Computer Based Education at the University of Johannesburg. She is interested in the utilization of technology for teaching and learning and intends to register a research project for the PHD in Computer Based Education in 2013 at the University of Johannesburg. Sibongile Simelane is a DEd candidate in the Faculty of Humanities, Department of Mathematics and Science at Tshwane University of Technology, as well as a senior Instructional Designer at the Department of Teaching and Learning with Technology. Research interests include technology-enhanced teaching and learning, online training and empowerment, eassessment and emerging technologies in teaching and learning. Imelda Smit is a lecturer at the Vaal Triangle Campus of the North-West University in Vanderbijlpark, South Africa. She is subject chair of Information Technology and lectures Systems Analysis and Design to second year students. Her research interests are the philosophy of Dooyeweerd and education of Information Technology subjects. Sonia Sousa holds a PhD in Education from Sheffield Hallam University, UK and an honors degree in Communication Engineering from Universidade Fernando Pessoa, Portugal. She is currently researching the influence of trust in online communities. Her R&D work includes Michigan State University's MIND Lab, United States of America and Universidade Fernando Pessoa Multimedia Research Center, Portugal. Kristian Stewart is a faculty member in the Writing Program and the University of Michigan-Dearborn. In addition, she is also a doctoral student in the School of Education at the same university and currently holds a King-Chavez-Park Fellowship in support of her doctoral work. Juliet Stoltenkamp, Head of the Centre for Innovative Educational and Communication Technologies (CIECT) at the University of the Western Cape, manages the integration and implementation of educational technologies; and cultivates leadership on xvi

a strategic, developmental and operational level. She has worked as an educator; instructional designer; manager; and in academic policy decision-making bodies in higher education institutions. Vusi Tsabedze is a Senior Consultant and Head of Discipline: Business Management & Information Technology. He is an accredited trainer and assessor in the vocational sector through Botswana Training Authority. He holds a MA in Information Studies with University of Zululand. His research interests include electronic records management and e-government. James Uhomoibhi is an academic of international standing; He is a Nigerian LEADS Scholar and a MEX Scholar in the UK. He is a fellow of the BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT, a fellow of the Higher Education Academy and a Chartered Physicist. He is widely published and coordinates E-learning activities in his university. Dr. Patrick Uko is a native of Abak Local Government Area of Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. He went through all formal schooling and served as a classroom teacher at various levels of education. He is currently the provost of the College of Education, Afaha Nsit, Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. Dr. Uko has written and published many articles in national and international journals. Dr Petr Votapek is a lecturer of Machine Design at the University of West Bohemia. His PhD was about the Reducing material and energy demands in the field of curing presses. He is an employee of the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, where he is involved in the enhancement of teaching process. Jing Wang is an Assistant Professor of Decision Sciences at the University of New Hampshire. Her research focuses on the areas of IT Outsourcing, Open Source Software, and e-commerce. Her work has been published in Decision Support Systems, Journal of Strategic Information Systems, Journal of Business Research and Journal of Information Systems. Carlton Watson received his baccalaureate and doctoral physics degrees from Prairie View A and M University and The University of Iowa respectively. An experimental condensed matter physicist by training, he has worked in the semiconductor industry in the United States and is currently an associate professor of physics at The College of The Bahamas. Ricky Watson is a senior lecturer in the Department of Computing at Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology, New Zealand. He has a particular interest in virtualisation technologies, having used VMware since 2001 and more recently worked extensively with VMware cloud technologies platform. He and colleague, Eduardo Correia, designed and built TechLabs, a teaching network based on virtualisation. Professor Denise Wood is Associate Head, Teaching and Learning, School of Communication, International Studies and Languages, University of South Australia, and an Extraordinary Professor (adjunct), at the University of the Western Cape, South Africa. Her research focuses on the use of digital technologies to improve learning outcomes and the social participation of young people from disadvantaged backgrounds. Azliza Yacob is a lecturer and a researcher at Terengganu Advanced Technical Institute University College (TATiUC). She holds a Master of Science (Information Technology â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Manufacturing) and a Bachelor of Science (Computer) at University Technology Malaysia (UTM). Her research interests include Computer programming, Quality control, education and computer industry. Her main research concentrates on adapting manufacturing techniques into the learning process. Malie Zeeman is a lecturer in Computer Science at the Vaal Triangle campus of North-West University. She is a Masters student in serious games as teaching tool. Her specific field of interest is computer programming and system design and development.

xvii

A Lecturer’s Perception of the Adoption of the Inverted Classroom or Flipped Method of Curriculum Delivery in a Hydrology Course, in a Resource Poor University of Technology Eunice Ivala, Anton Thiart and Daniela Gachago Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape Town, South Africa ivalae@cput.ac.za thiarta@cput.ac.za gachagod@cput.ac.za Abstract: The core business of any higher education institution (HEI) is to provide quality learning to its students by facilitating deep learning. More often than not, this goal is not fully achieved in most HEIs globally. This is in part due to over‐reliance on the lecture method of delivering instruction, a method which is not particularly an effective medium for promoting deep learning. The delivery of instruction in Civil Engineering at a University of Technology, South Africa, is predominantly via the lecture method. As a result, an alternative method of delivering curriculum in this field maybe needed in order to improve student learning. Informed by a modified technology acceptance model, this paper presents a lecturer’s perceptions on the adoption and benefits of the inverted classroom method (ICM) of delivering instruction in a hydrology course, in the Civil Engineering field. A qualitative approach of collecting data was used and the data consisted of recordings of an in‐depth interview with the lecturer and a workshop facilitated by the lecturer to introduce the ICM to 11 lecturers from various disciplines in the university. Data analysis was done deductively whereby relevant data were mapped to the constructs given in the conceptual framework. Some key findings were that the lecturer implemented the ICM due to his self‐efficacy, technological self‐efficacy and perceived usefulness of the ICM of curriculum delivery. The study also highlights the challenges experienced in, and effective ways of implementation, of the ICM of curriculum delivery at the university. Findings of this study will give insights and ideas on the adoption and benefits of the ICM of curriculum delivery in an engineering field at the university and also in other resource‐poor contexts, particularly in the African continent, where there is limited research and use of the ICM for instruction. Keywords: inverted classroom or flipped method of curriculum delivery, technology acceptance model, the lecture method of curriculum delivery, teacher self‐efficacy, technological self‐efficacy

1. Introduction The main business of any higher education institution (HEI) is to provide quality learning to its students, which can be facilitated by deep learning. More often than not, this goal is not fully achieved in most HEIs globally. This is in part due to over‐reliance on the lecture method of delivering instruction, a method which is not particularly an effective medium for promoting deep learning (Johnson et al. 1991; Bates & Galloway 2012). Drawing from a modified technology acceptance model (Chigona et al. 2012), this paper presents a lecturer’s perceptions on the adoption and benefits of ICM of delivering instruction in a hydrology course, in the Civil Engineering field, at a University of Technology, South Africa. The study was guided by the following questions:

What factors influenced the lecturer’s adoption of the ICM of curriculum delivery?

What was the lecturer’s perceived benefits of implementing ICM to himself and his students?

Some key findings were that the lecturer implemented the ICM due to his self‐efficacy, technological self‐ efficacy and perceived usefulness of the ICM of curriculum delivery.

2. Literature review Teaching and learning in higher education Institutions Most teaching in higher education is by the lecture method (Bates & Galloway 2012; Koller 2011), with the main emphasis being on coverage of content (Strayer 2007). Johnson et al. (1991) reports on several studies that show lectures are a relatively ineffective way of promoting learning (see also Bates & Galloway 2012). In the lectures, students are introduced to the materials or concepts, process the information, solve problems and practice with the course concepts and reach conclusions outside of the class (McDaniel & Caverly 2010; Talbert 2012). In Engineering education, Nguyen and Toto (2009) and Lord and Camacho (2007) report that majority of the classrooms still rely on the lecture model of delivery of course content. While this format has

207

Eunice Ivala, Anton Thiart and Daniela Gachago been effective, in practice, we still find significant problems with pacing of instruction and the fact that the most difficult tasks students have to perform generally appear in the work they do outside of class (homework), on their own and separated from the instructor’s help (Nguyen & Toto 2009; Talbert 2012). To improve on student learning, HEIs needs to use pedagogical approaches which promote deep student learning and thus, students’ high performance. One of these pedagogical approaches is the ‘Inverted classroom method’ (ICM) (Gannod et al.2008; Koller 2011), a term coined by a group of economic professors in Miami University (Ohio) (Lage et al. 2000). In the schooling sector, the ICM is often known as the ‘flipped classroom, a term coined by Bergmann (2011), a high school Chemistry teacher. The ICM of curriculum delivery uses technology to ‘flip’ or ‘invert’ the traditional lecture model (Strayer 2007). The method moves the lecture outside the classroom via technology and moves homework and practice with concepts inside the classroom via learning activities. The primary elements of the ICM are online lecture materials, in audio/video format, that students can access on demand, and a classroom environment that is conducive to working with peers and the lecturer, problem solving and answering questions (Demetry 2010; Gannod et al. 2008; Lage et al. 2000; McDaniel & Caverly 2010; Nguyen & Toto 2009; Strayer 2007). Hence, online materials are used to provide the first introduction to course topics and classroom time is used to process the information and solve problems. According to Lage at el. (2000), the inverted classroom environment is not a new idea and Gardner (2012:2) argues that, “the modern version of inverted class, which is characterized by online videos, is already over a decade old”. However, the method is new to many faculty and in recent times, has received increased attention. An advantage of the ICM are the out‐of‐class activities, which include students watching online videos introducing course concepts, showing examples, giving quizzes or exercises and modeling problem solving process (Doering & Mu 2010; Talbert 2012). By using videos this way, students who would have found the lecture pace slow are able to work quickly through material that they already know and delve into more interesting and challenging problems (Koller 2011). Students who would have struggled with concepts can access the course materials when they are ready to learn, and at anytime of the day and are able to rewind and watch tricky segments many times (Gannod et al.2008; Gardner 2012; Strayer 2007). Students can also pause and reflect on the lecture materials when needed (Talbert 2012). By watching the videos out of class, students arrive in class prepared to practice the ideas to which they’ve already been exposed. An assignment over the material is given and student work in groups. The students are involved in active and peer learning, while the lecturer walks around, observing their work and offering appropriate assistance. Students who struggle with the concepts benefit from the instructors time, time that the instructor spends identifying the particular and individual sources of a student’s confusion, hence promoting personalized instruction. The faster students may also serve as peer mentors (Gannod et al. 2008; Koller 2012; McDaniel & Caverly 2010; Strayer 2007) for the other students in the class, this would mean the slower students have more help available to learn the concepts. The faster students might achieve the deeper understanding that comes from explaining a concept to someone else. This might also mitigate the risk in self‐ paced learning where a student quickly crams through material, but isn’t engaged with it for a long enough time for long‐term retention. The ICM is criticized for assuming that every student has access to technology (computer, smartphone or tablet) and Internet connectivity (Gardner 2012), an unrealistic expectation especially in developing countries, like South Africa. For the method to work well for instructional delivery, majority of the students must engage with the online materials before class, a scenario that is highly unlikely without developing an enforcement mechanism. Furthermore, developing inverted classroom materials is labor intensive and time consuming (Bates & Galloway 2012; Talbert 2012), for lecturers who are expected to teach as well as do research. However, ICM is still useful despite the criticisms. Even with this potential to promote effective learning, there are few research studies that specifically investigate the ICM globally (Strayer 2007), and particularly [ in Africa].This paper presents a lecturer’s perceptions on the adoption and benefits of ICM of delivering instruction in a hydrology course, in the civil Engineering field, at a University of Technology, South Africa.

208

Eunice Ivala, Anton Thiart and Daniela Gachago

3. Course details The hydrology course is a third year module within the Water Engineering subject 3 and contributes 50% of marks towards the subject. The water Engineering 3 subject contributes towards the attainment of a national diploma in Civil Engineering. It is a compulsory one semester course taught in the second semester, with two‐ one‐ hour lectures per week. The course is aimed at imparting the principles and practices of engineering hydrology through the use of examples and calculations. The lecture method of curriculum delivery is used to teach course content, supplemented by student interaction with information through home work, lab session, project and discussions out of class to make meaning of the course content. The course was co‐taught by two lecturers. Inverted classroom method was not implemented in the delivery of the entire course but on selected topics of the course. The selected topics were: introduction to hydrology; meteorological data; evaporation and transpiration; and infiltration and percolation. The lecturer implemented the ICM by providing basic materials on course content to students via online videos (using a shared drive on the institutional intranet for long videos and drop‐box for short videos as access systems), short documents on the course website and continuously encouraging the students to engage with the materials through a closed Facebook group. Links from drop box were also posted in the Facebook group. Students were supposed to engage with the online materials at home in preparation for the class. In class, students worked in groups with more complex questions on the course content, with the lecturer assisting and guiding them when needed and students helping each other.

4. Theoretical framework The paper draws on a modified technology acceptance model (TAM) (Chigona et al. 2012), to investigate and understand a lecturer’s perceptions on the adoption and benefits of ICM of delivering instruction in a hydrology course, in the Civil Engineering field. Although this model’s focus is on technology acceptance, we felt that it would be suitable for understanding the adoption of ICM since the method relies heavily on technology. The adapted TAM framework (see figure 1) was developed by integrating two constructs (technological self‐efficacy and teacher self efficacy) onto Davis’s (1989) original model (see figure 2), which stipulates that individuals accept and use a new technology if they perceive it to be useful and easy to use which both determine an individual’s intention to use of the innovation. According to McDonald and Siegall (1992), technological self‐efficacy is “the belief in one’s ability to successfully perform a technologically sophisticated new task”. An example of technological self‐efficacy is an individual’s perception of his or her ability to use computers in the accomplishment of a task rather than reflecting a simple component skill (Compeau & Higgins 1995). Research show that technological self‐efficacy influences perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use of a technology (Chigona et al. 2012; Skoretz 2011). On the other hand, teacher’s efficacy is defined as the teacher’s “judgment of his or her capabilities to bring about desired outcomes of student engagement and learning, even among those students who may be difficult or unmotivated” (Tscannen‐Moran & Hoy 2001:1).

External Variables Technological Self‐efficacy

Perceived Ease of Use of ICM Behavioural Intention to use in ICM

Teacher self efficacy

Perceived Usefulness of ICM

Figure 1: Conceptual framework adapted from Davis’ original TAM Model (Chigona et al. 2012)

209

Eunice Ivala, Anton Thiart and Daniela Gachago Perceived Ease of Use Behavioural Intention to use

External Variables

Actual system use

Perceived Usefulness Figure 2: Technology acceptance model (Davis 1989) Perceived usefulness is “the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would enhance his or her job performance” (Davis 1989), while perceived ease‐of‐use is “the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would be free from effort” (Davis 1989).

5. Methodology A qualitative approach was employed in this study with an aim of understanding a lecturer’s perceptions on the adoption and benefits of ICM of delivering instruction in a hydrology course, in the Civil Engineering field. This approach was suitable for the study because of its strength in investigating experiences as they are ‘ lived’ or ‘felt’ or ‘undergone’ by the participants (Sherman & Webb 1988).

5.1 Context and participants The main participant in this study is an Engineering lecturer (The first lecturer to use ICM of curriculum delivery at the university), who implemented the ICM of curriculum delivery in a hydrology class in 2012 and offered a training workshop to 11 lecturers on ICM in November 2012. Thus, a purposive sampling was used (Neuman 1997). He was chosen because he had rich information gained through practice (Patton 1990) and was thought to be likely to reflect on the complexity of implementing the ICM in a resource–poor institution like this university.

5.2 Data collection A qualitative approach of collecting data was used. Data consisted of recordings of an in‐depth interview with the lecturer and a workshop facilitated by the lecturer to introduce the ICM to 11 lecturers from various disciplines in the university.

5.3 Data analysis Data was analysed using the adapted TAM Framework constructs. The constructs were: technological self‐ efficacy; teacher self efficacy; perceived usefulness of the ICM; and perceived ease of use of the ICM (see figure 2). Analysis was done deductively whereby relevant data were mapped to the constructs given in the conceptual framework. The researchers in this study acknowledge that findings of this study are not generalisable, but offer valuable insights, which others interested in the implementation of the ICM of curriculum delivery could draw from. Consent to participate in the study was sought and the purpose of the study was explained to the lecturer. Interview and workshop transcripts were available for the lecturer to scrutinize. Anonymity and confidentiality was adhered to as promised to the lecturer. Ethical clearance was given by Fundani ethics committee.

6. Results and discussion The paper reports on a lecturer’s perceptions on the adoption and benefits ICM of delivering instruction in a hydrology course, in the civil Engineering field, at University of Technology, South Africa. Findings and discussion are presented under the following categories.

Technological self‐efficacy

Teacher Self efficacy

210

Eunice Ivala, Anton Thiart and Daniela Gachago

Perceived usefulness of the ICM

Perceived ease of use of the ICM

6.1 Technological self‐efficacy According to Compeau & Higgins ( 1995), an example of technological self‐efficacy is an individual’s perception of his or her ability to use computers in the accomplishment of a task rather than reflecting A simple component skill. Inverted classroom method relies heavily on technology, but most faculty at this university, like elsewhere, have not learned their subject content with these technologies and hence do not have essential experiences in learning with these technologies nor have they been prepared to teach their content with these new and emerging technologies (Niess 2011). However, the lecturer in this study implemented ICM partly because he possessed technological self‐efficacy: …although I’ve studied Engineering I also come from a very strong IT background …I did three year Software Diploma and I’ve always been interested in technology. I think I’m not scared of technology. I find it sometimes a stumbling block for lecturers to get because they are a little bit scared of technology and ...for me it is second nature. From the above results, it can be inferred that lecturers’ technological self‐efficacy influence their decisions to adopt ICM of curriculum delivery, due to the methods reliance on technology for delivering course materials outside the classroom (Strayer 2007). Technological self‐efficacy is needed in order for a lecturer to be able to source or develop the online materials.

6.2 Teacher self efficacy The ICM of curriculum delivery, uses technology to ‘flip’ or ‘invert’ the traditional lecture model (Strayer 2007) by moving the lecture outside the classroom via technology and homework and practice with concepts inside the classroom via learning activities. To change from delivering instruction using the lecture method, a method which dominates most teaching in HE globally (Bates & Galloway 2012; Koller 2011), the lecturers need to have self‐efficacy (lecturers’ “judgment of his or her capabilities to bring about the desired outcomes of students engagement and learning” (Tscannen‐Moran & Hoy 2001:1). Lecturers’ who have positive self‐ efficacy will feel confident to include new pedagogical approaches in their classroom. In this study, the lecturer seemed confident enough to teach using the ICM. The lecturer’s self‐efficacy to teach with ICM is demonstrated in the following quotes: …I had a particular problem this year that they gave me …two hour slots after lunch two days, consecutive days. So the students arrived tired, struggled to concentrate… So I thought you know I cannot use normal techniques here, it’s not going to work, you know because they’ll fall asleep … Now if I can get them involved, I can hear them talking and engaging, I feel that’s a great way of stimulating conversation and learning more… …I’ve lectured a lot of subjects over many years and it does get boring doing the same thing over and over and it’s probably my biggest motivation …I’m looking for things that makes it not only interesting for the student but start making it interesting for me because it’s my job … Making things exciting but it’s nice and that’s why some lecturers are also actually buying in on it because it brings back some excitement in their teaching … The above findings show that this lecturer had very high levels of self‐efficacy as he was able to reflect on his own teaching methods (lecture method) and the context of teaching (lecture time slots at lunch time when students are tired) and how it impacted on students learning (students not concentrating). He was also able to come up with ways of changing his teaching and student learning, which included the decision to adopt the ICM in order to be able to actively engage students in learning. He also adopted the method to make his work more enjoyable and exciting. The lecturer’s self–efficacy was also shown by the fact that he was confident enough to facilitate a staff training workshop on the ICM at the university.

6.3 Perceived usefulness of the ICM It is commonsense that many faculty would adopt a new pedagogical approach when the approach is perceived to help improve the teaching and learning process. According to Davis (1989) perceived usefulness is the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would enhance his or her job. The lecturer

211

Eunice Ivala, Anton Thiart and Daniela Gachago in this study believed that the ICM of curriculum delivery was useful for facilitating deep learning and enhancing his job, as evidenced in the following quotes: …the things I did right was the whole idea of giving the material beforehand, basic material and then coming to class and then carry on with a little bit more advanced examples… questions that require cognitive engagement, when I’m there to prompt them and help them and they help each other obviously. They help each other actually a lot. Sometimes they don’t even want the lecturer to give them help... what happens in normal classrooms is the lecturer stands up and …does basic examples and then he tells students’ to go back do homework and the homework is then more advanced… … it [ICM] enriched my job because I’m unfortunately in the situation that I will probably be stuck as a lecturer … till I retire. So I have to make my life interesting. I have to enrich my own life and I have to use new methods. And it definitely did … I’m getting some exposure, meeting some new people…and I’m making new contacts all the time now…

6.4 Perceived ease of use of the ICM The perceived ease–of‐use of an innovation is “the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would be free from effort” (Davis 1989). The way lecturers perceive how ease the ICM is to use in the classroom influence their decision to adopt the method for their teaching or not. In this study, the lecturer indicated that the method was useful for enhancing deep student learning and his job, but expressed that the method was not ease to use because it was labor intensive and time consuming to make the online materials and that one needed to motivate students to ensure that they engaged with course materials at home. I don’t think it’s easy because it takes a lot of preparation… you have to prepare new material where you could have just stuck with the old, … it takes time to make little videos and editing it. …to actually shoot the video it takes probably four/five times as long to edit it… I believe that this inverted classroom needs to go hand in hand with a good communication tool because if you want to give students stuff to do outside the classroom there needs to be constant communication… I think a major problem would be just to let the student be and when he comes to class again then he says well I didn’t understand what I was supposed to do or whatever…. I set up Facebook …for the subject and I had all 50 students actually in the group and it was a closed group… we had constant questions from students, posting of things that’s happening, go look on the shared drive for this thing and do that. So the instructions didn’t only take place in the classroom, the communication went right through the week. These results are similar to findings by Bates and Galloway (2012) and Talbert (2012). According to the lecturer, a mind shift on how one teaches is needed to embrace the ICM and constant communication with students is required to ensure that students engage with course materials outside the classroom. The lecturer also reported that at the university it was not ease to use the ICM because of contextual and social issues, as he explained in the following quotes: …let’s say two lecturers lecture the same subject we have to agree on the assessment. Now this deeper learning that took place might not be assessed because we’re back to the old way of let’s say we taught in class and we have to assess those basic things. So maybe if a paper was set with more higher level questions it would have come out more clearly. But I must say my class did way better than the other group but I can’t say it was because of the inverted… …I don’t know about other places but you can come and look at our classrooms. They’re terrible …I want to show a little video of something … using a data projector, I don’t have sound, then you could hardly see because there’s no way I can make the classroom a bit darker. It’s very noisy and it’s uncomfortable… … what is happening because our facilities are so poor, if I have to go to class and use technology there, I bought myself a trolley. In the trolley I put my laptop, data projector, my two speakers, my extension cord... Now I trolley this to the classroom…tea time I would go fifteen minutes before the time …and set up my things. And then of course at lunchtime when we stop I have to take down all this lot again – put it in my trolley and off I go back. Now that in itself is really a big stumbling block for anyone who wants to implement this because it’s really too much hassle.

212

Eunice Ivala, Anton Thiart and Daniela Gachago The above findings show that co‐teaching a course, poor classroom conditions, and lack of technology and technical support in the use of technology in teaching and learning may hinder lecturers’ use of the ICM at the university. The provision of good teaching facilities and technical support in the use of technology would make lecturers find the ICM easy to use.

7. Conclusion Findings of the study show that the lecturer perceived the use of the ICM of curriculum delivery significant for promoting deep learning and enhancing job satisfaction. Through this method, the lecturer managed to create a learning environment which encouraged student participation in class (both for slow and high aptitude students); independent learning; high students‐student interaction with the course content; student ‐contents interaction and student‐lecturer interaction, characteristics of teaching and learning which promote deep learning (Anderson 2003). Additionally, results indicate that lecturers’ adoption of the ICM is to some extent affected by lecturers’ technological self‐efficacy coupled with teacher self efficacy, as the lecturer in this study adopted the method partly due to his self efficacy and technological self‐efficacy. Because of the labor intensity and time needed to produce online materials, and the contextual and social issues at the university, the lecturer perceived the adoption of the ICM not easy. Findings of the study also demonstrated that it is important for lecturers to try innovative pedagogical approaches because it demonstrates to the students that the lecturers are trying to help them learn, which may improve their motivation. …I think students are becoming more and more technology savvy…If you look at the response of students [on the use of ICM] they’re actually fine with you trying these type of things and they do enjoy it because that’s what they are using everyday [technology] We are also convinced that an institution that aspires to greatness and innovation has to be open to support a wide variety of pedagogical approaches, of which ICM is one. Further in‐depth research will be done to examine students’ perceptions on the use of the ICM for their instruction in this course.

References Anderson, T. (2003). “Getting the mix right: an updated and theoretical rationale for interaction”, Vol.4, No. 2. [online] http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/149 Bates, S. and Galloway, R. (2012). “The inverted classroom in a large enrolment introductory physics course: a case study”, Higher Education Academy, [online], http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/stem‐ conference/PhysicalSciences/Simon_Bates_Ross_Galloway.pdf Bergmann, B. (2011). “The history of the flipped class: how the flipped class was born (Web log post)”, [Online]http://www.blendedclassroom.blogpost.com/ Chigona, A., Condy, J., Gachago, D. and Ivala, E. (2012). “Examining pre‐service teachers’ perceptions on uptake of digital storytelling for classroom use”, In Proceedings of World Conference on E‐Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2012 (pp. 1621‐1628). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. [Online] http://www.editlib.org/p/41839. Compeau, D.R. and Higgins, C.A. (1995). “Computer self‐efficacy: development of a measure and initial tests”, MIS Quarterly , Vol. 19 , No. 2, 189‐211. Davis, F.E. (1989). “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information Technology”, MIS Quarterly, Vol., 13, No. 3, 319‐340. Demetry , C. (2010). “Work in progress‐an innovation merging “classroom Flip” and team‐based learning”, 40 th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Washington, DC, October 27‐30. Doering, E. and Mu, X. (2010). “ CLEO: circuit learned by example online”, [Online] http://www.rose_hulman.edu/cleo Gannod, G. C., Burge, J.E., and Helmick, M.T. (2008). “Using the inverted classroom to teach software engineering,” In proceedings of the 30 th International Conference on Software Engineering (Liepzing, Germany, ACM, New York, NY‐ 777‐786, May 10‐18, DOI, [Online] http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1368088.1368198. Gardner, J. G. (2012). “The inverted agricultural economics classroom: A new way to teach? A new way to learn?”, Selected paper prepared for presentation at the Agriculture and Applied Economics Association’s 2012 AAEA Annual meeting, Seatle, Washington, August 12‐14. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T. and Smith, K. A. (1991). Cooperative learning: increased college faculty instructional productivity, ASHE‐ERIC Higher education Report No. 4, The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development, Washington , D. C. Koller, D. (2011). “Death knell for the lecture: Technology as a passport to personalized education”, The New York Times, Reprints.

213

Eunice Ivala, Anton Thiart and Daniela Gachago Lage, M., Platt, G., and Treglia, M. (2000). “Inverting classroom: a gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment”, Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 31, No. 1, 30‐43. Lord, S. M. and Camacho, M.M. (2007). “Effective teaching practices: preliminary Analysis of Engineering teaching practices”, In: Proceedings of the 37 th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, October. McDaniel, S. and Caverly. D (2010). The community of inquiry model for an inverted developmental math classroom, Journal of Developmental Education, Vol. 34, No. 2. McDolnald, T., and Siegall, M. (1992). “The effects of technological self‐efficacy and job performance, attitudes, and withdraw behaviors”, The journal of Psychology, Vol. 126, 465‐475. Neuman, W.L. (1997). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative approaches, 3rd edn, Allayn and Bacon, Boston. Nguyen, H .M. and Toto, R. (2009). “Flipping the work design in an industrial Engineering course”, 39 th ASEE/1EEE Frontiers in Education Conference, San Antonio, TX. Niess, M.L. (2011). “Investigating TPACK: Knowledge growth in teaching with technology”, Journal of Educational Computing Research, Vol,. 44, No. 3, 299‐317. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods, 2rd edn, Newbury Park, California: sage Publication. Sherman, R. and Webb, R. (Eds.) 1988. Qualitative research in education: Forms and methods, Falmer, Lewes, UK. Skoretz, Y.M. (2011). “A study of the impact of a school‐based, job‐Embedded professional development program on elementary and middle school teacher efficacy for technology integration. Theses and dissertations, Paper 150”. [online] htp://mds.marshall.edu/etd/150. Strayer, J. F. (2007). The effects of the classroom flip on the learning environment: A comparison of learning activity in a traditional classroom and a flip classroom that used an intelligent tutoring system, Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements’ for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in graduate school of the Ohio State University, USA. Talbert, R. (2012).” Inverted classroom”, Colleagues, Vol. 9, No. 1. Article 7, [Online]http://www. scholarworks.gvsu.edu/colleagues/vol9/issue1/7. Accessed 16 January 2013. Tschannen‐Moran, M. and Hoy, W.A. (2001). “Teacher efficacy: capturing an elusive construct”, Teacher and Teacher Education, Vol., 17, 783‐805.

214

The TPACK‐in‐Practice Workshop Approach: A Shift From Learning the Tool to Learning About Technology‐Enhanced Teaching Kamini Jaipal Jamani and Candace Figg Brock University, St. Catharines, Canada kjaipal@brocku.ca cfigg@brocku.ca Abstract: Technology professional development workshops primarily focus on technical skill training and these skills are often taught out of context and seem remote from classroom practice. How can educators learn how to teach with technology in a variety of disciplinary areas so that their professional learning experiences are considered valuable and are readily integrated into their teaching practice? This paper presents the Framework of TPACK‐in‐Practice—concrete teacher actions, or practice‐derived teacher knowledge about teaching content with technology—and illustrates the framework’s usefulness in developing the TPACK‐in‐Practice Workshop approach to design content‐centric technology professional development experiences for teachers and higher education faculty. A content‐centric approach to teaching with technology advances the learning of content goals through the use of technology, and a current framework that has been adopted by teacher educators internationally is that of TPACK, proposed by Mishra & Koehler. This model, developed from Shulman’s notion of pedagogical content knowledge, illustrates the interactions among technology knowledge (TK), pedagogical knowledge (PK), and content knowledge (CK) in teaching. To bridge the gap between the theoretically defined knowledge components of the TPACK model, and the actions that demonstrate these knowledge components in practice, the authors conducted qualitative, longitudinal studies with pre‐service teachers and in‐service teachers in the field. Findings of these studies led to the development of the Framework of TPACK‐in‐Practice which identifies teacher actions that characterize teacher knowledge important for successful tech‐enhanced teaching, specifically the knowledge components of TCK‐in‐practice, TPK‐in‐practice, and TPCK‐in‐practice. Subsequent implementation of the Framework of TPACK‐in‐Practice in pre‐service technology courses and with in‐service teachers revealed four design elements promoting a shift from learning the tool to learning how to teach with the tool (technology‐enhanced teaching). These elements include: (a) modeling a technology‐enhanced activity (learning with the tool) to set the context and purpose for tool use, (b) integrating ‘pedagogical dialogue’ in a modeled lesson, (c) developing activity‐specific technical skills (TK in context) through short tool demonstrations, and (d) applying TPACK‐in‐Practice to design an independent task. The preceding four elements constitute the TPACK‐in‐Practice Workshop approach and provide guidelines for designing content‐centric professional development workshops to develop teacher knowledge about how to teach with technology. The TPACK‐in‐ Practice Workshop approach enables teachers to leave professional development workshops with the knowledge to be able to teach WITH the technology rather than just the skills be use the technology as is promoted in traditional technology training workshops. Keywords: technology‐enhanced teaching, teacher knowledge, professional development, technology integration, TPACK

1. Introduction Current approaches on how teacher knowledge about teaching with technology is developed can be described as a shift from a skills or techno‐centric focus (Papert 1987) to a content‐centric approach where the focus is on how to teach content with technology (Angeli & Valanides 2009; Figg & Burson 2011; Fisher, Dwyer & Yokum 1996; Harris 2005; Harris, Mishra & Koehler 2007, 2009; McKenzie 2001; Means a& Olson 1997; Roblyer, Edwards & Havriluk 1997). This shift in approach to developing technology knowledge is a response to research that shows that learning how to use the tool does not appear to impact teacher use of the tools in daily instructional practices with their students (Angeli & Valanides 2009; Becker 1994; Hadley & Sheingold, 1993; Schrum 2005). In a skills‐based technology course or workshop, technical skills learned are not situated in authentic teaching contexts. Many teachers leave these sessions or workshops “wondering about their utility and worth” (McKenzie, 2001, p. 151). How can educators learn how to teach with technology in a variety of disciplinary areas so that their technology professional learning experiences are considered valuable and are readily integrated into their teaching practice? This paper presents the Framework of TPACK‐in‐Practice— concrete teacher actions, or practice‐derived teacher knowledge about teaching content with technology— and illustrates the framework’s usefulness in developing the TPACK‐in‐Practice Workshop approach to design content‐centric, technology professional development experiences for teachers and higher education faculty. This workshop approach will also provide educational insights to technology companies that provide technology training workshops for educators in the field.

215

Kamini Jaipal Jamani and Candace Figg

2. Theoretical framework A content‐centric approach to teaching with technology highlights the relationships among content, pedagogy, and technology, and a current framework that has been adopted by teacher educators internationally is that of the TPACK framework (Mishra and Koehler 2006). The TPACK model builds upon Shulman’s (1986, 1987) notion of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and it provides a theoretical lens to understand the different knowledge types necessary for teachers to teach content with technology within the broader teaching context. Particularly, the notion of “technological pedagogical content knowledge” (TPACK)—knowledge of how to use particular technology to teach specific content—has been widely adopted by teacher educators to design their courses in pre‐service and graduate teacher education programs ( Figg & Jaipal 2012; Jaipal & Figg 2010b; Lee & Kim 2011; So & Kim 2009; Williams, Foulger & Wetzel 2009). The TPACK model highlights different types of knowledge that arise from the interaction of technology and pedagogy (technological pedagogical knowledge—TPK) and technology and content (technological content knowledge—TCK). However, descriptions of theoretical constructs do not illuminate what these knowledge types might look like in the practice of teaching. To bridge the gap between the theoretical constructs of TPACK and the actions that demonstrate the TPACK knowledge components in practice, the authors (Figg & Jaipal 2009; Figg & Jaipal 2012; Jaipal & Figg 2010a; Jaipal & Figg 2010b, Jaipal & Figg 2012) conducted longitudinal studies with pre‐ service and in‐service teachers in the field.

3. Methodology and data collection methods Three consecutive studies were conducted over 6 years. All study designs were predominantly qualitative (Creswell, 2005) and explored how technology was integrated into teaching practice in elementary schools. Study 1 and 2 involved a total of 12 elementary pre‐service teachers (four participants in study 1 and eight participants in study 2) teaching a variety of subjects during the practicum. Four in‐service middle school teachers integrating technology in science participated in study 3. Data collection methods included: 1) a questionnaire to obtain background information, attitude towards, and competency with technology, 2) a pre‐ interview that explored the beliefs and experiences of the participants regarding their use of technology in teaching, 3) at least two classroom observations of teaching practice (audio‐recorded), 4) post‐lesson debriefing sessions (audio‐recorded), 5) a post, focus group interview ( video‐recorded) with study 1 participants and individual, post‐interviews with study 2 and 3 participants (audio‐recorded), and 6) lesson plans and students’ work. For each study, interviews were transcribed verbatim and the two authors, reading independently through field notes and transcripts of interviews and classroom observations, identified key descriptor phrases or common actions. Key descriptor phrases or actions were aggregated and coded into general categories or themes. The general categories were categorised as TPACK characteristics in relation to the three technology components of TPACK. For example, the teacher action of building technical skills in increments through the teaching of subject matter content was coded as sequencing (a skill related to planning the lesson); sequencing is one of the characteristics representing TPK. This cross‐case analysis led to the development of a comprehensive framework to illuminate characteristics and actions that demonstrate the components of TPACK in teaching practice.

4. The framework of TPACK‐in‐Practice Since our TPACK framework was developed from the practice of teachers as they were observed teaching a variety of subjects in elementary school, we refer to it as the Framework of TPACK‐in‐Practice (see Figure 1). The TPACK‐in Practice knowledge components were derived from the interactions of TK with PCK, CK, and PK respectively and are referred to as TPCK‐in‐Practice, TCK‐in‐Practice, and TPK‐in‐Practice. Figure 1 illustrates the characteristics and actions (for some characteristics) for TPCK‐in‐Practice, TCK‐in‐Practice, and TPK‐in‐ Practice that overall contribute to TPACK‐in‐Practice. In the next section, some of the characteristics and actions are explained. A full explanation of the characteristics and actions is in press (Figg & Jaipal, in press).

4.1 TPCK‐in‐Practice The knowledge component TPCK‐in‐Practice refers to knowledge about how teachers think about representing content using technology in instruction, demonstrated in practice by the following two teacher characteristics.

216

Kamini Jaipal Jamani and Candace Figg

Figure 1: The framework of TPACK‐in‐Practice 4.1.1 Repertoire of tech‐enhanced activity types representing content knowledge Harris and Hofer (2009, 2010) have developed taxonomies of technology supported learning activity types for different subject areas. They describe a Learning Activity Type as connecting curriculum‐based learning goals with content area‐specific learning activities and complementary technology tools….Each activity type captures what is most essential about the structure of a particular kind of learning action as it relates to what students do when engaged in that particular learning‐related activity (e.g., “view a presentation;” “collect data;” “make predictions”) (p. 3858). For each subject area, a number of Activity Types have been identified and matched to possible technologies. For example, in science, the Activity Type, “collect data” can be achieved by using the following possible technologies or tools: graphing calculators, video, audio, digital cameras, digital microscopes, and web‐based data sets. In relation to our Framework of TPACK‐in‐Practice (refer to Figure 1), teachers who have knowledge of a repertoire of technology‐enhanced Activity Types are better able to select appropriate technology tools for content instruction. 4.1.2 Knowledge of content‐based models of teaching appropriate for tech‐enhanced activity types Since TPCK is derived from the interaction of technology knowledge with PCK, knowledge of Models of Teaching (Joyce, Weil & Calhoun 2004) is an important component of teacher knowledge. In technology‐ enhanced lessons in different content areas, teachers need knowledge about which technologies match content‐appropriate Models of Teaching. For example, if the learning activity goal is for learners to visually experience the effect of temperature changes on particle motion, then the Scientific Inquiry Model of Teaching is appropriate for structuring a lesson using an online particle motion simulation. On the other hand, if the learning outcome is for students to merely gain an understanding of how particles move, then viewing a static animation in a lesson structure based on the Direct Instruction Model of Teaching would be appropriate.

217

Kamini Jaipal Jamani and Candace Figg

4.2 TCK‐in‐Practice The knowledge component TCK‐in‐Practice is conceptualised as the knowledge teachers use to select and think about how to use content‐appropriate technologies, or cross‐disciplinary technologies, in instruction, and their personal competence at using these technologies. This knowledge is illustrated in the following two teacher characteristics. 4.2.1 Knowledge of content‐appropriate technologies This characteristic is demonstrated by the following two actions:

Matching discipline‐specific tools to the content. There are different technologies that facilitate the achievement of learning goals more effectively in different disciplines. For example, understanding how to use probe ware to generate science data.

Repurposing tools of other disciplines to match content. “Most technologies are not designed for educational purposes” (Kereluik, Mishra & Koehler, 2010, p 3896). Therefore, teachers need to be able to repurpose tools, “where a tool designed for one purpose is “re‐seen” in a new pedagogical light” (p 3896). For example using a calculator in Geography to do map calculations repurposes the calculator for instructional purposes.

4.2.2 Competence with content‐appropriate technologies This characteristic is demonstrated by the following two actions:

Identifying technical skills needed for discipline‐based tool use. For example, math teachers introduce basic calculation skills before proceeding to using calculators for exponent or algebraic calculations.

Identifying personal skill levels of tool use. As a part of TCK‐in‐Practice, teachers develop a general awareness of the limitations of their personal technical skill and comfort level with content‐appropriate tools. This awareness is necessary so that teachers can select technology tools that they are comfortable with and can use competently in instruction.

4.3 TPK‐in‐Practice This knowledge component includes practical teaching competencies (i.e., classroom management, differentiated support, and assessment). We further categorize the TPK characteristics into three categories that are representative of TPACK‐in‐Practice: planning, preparation, and implementation (Jaipal & Figg, 2010a). Figure 2 illustrates the characteristics and actions related to the planning category of TPK‐in‐Practice. Figure 3 illustrates the characteristics and actions related to the Implementation category. A few illustrative examples are given below. 4.3.1 TPK‐in‐Practice: Planning—activity choices The characteristic Activity Choices, which is knowledge of how to select tech‐enhanced activities for a lesson/unit, is demonstrated by the following actions:

Select tech‐enhanced activities based on subject matter learning outcomes/goals: This involves having the knowledge to select a tech‐enhanced learning activity based on content learning outcomes or goals, instead of technical skill outcomes or goals. For example, a concept mapping tool such as Inspirations is selected so students can illustrate the relationships between the ingredients used to make a fast food meal in a Social Studies lesson. While using the tool to achieve the content learning goals, students learn the few necessary technical skills required to construct the concept map.

Incorporate a variety of technology‐enhanced activities: Knowledge of how to incorporate a variety of tech‐enhanced activities within a lesson to meet the learning goals is evidence of successful TPK‐in‐ Practice. For example, a tech‐enhanced lesson might include introducing the content with a Jeopardy Game (PowerPoint), followed by a core learning activity that engages students working in pairs to design a concept map of the content being taught, and concluding with students contributing to a Google Drive page to collaboratively notate what they learned.

218

Kamini Jaipal Jamani and Candace Figg

Refine activities through collaborative review: Our research showed that collaborative planning with associate teachers or peers provided opportunities for reflection, review, and refinement of lesson plans and improved tech‐enhanced implementation of lessons.

Figure 2: Planning characteristics of TPK‐in‐Practice 4.3.2 TPK‐in‐Practice: Planning—sequencing The knowledge of how to sequence tech‐enhanced activities includes actions such as:

Build technology and content skills within lesson and unit. Successful tech‐enhanced lessons were characterised by sequencing activities within a lesson and unit to build technical skills and content knowledge. For example, in a Language Arts unit on forms of media, a comic strip is discussed as a form of media that is produced for specific audiences. Comic Life was used to create comic strips over a series of lessons as one of the forms. For students to be successful at creating the final product, a Manga comic strip, students were taught both the necessary language and technical skills in the series of lessons.

Develop technical skills in increments through content activities: Rather than teaching technical skills in isolation, the focus of a tech‐enhanced lesson should be on learning the subject matter content. However, technical skills are necessary to facilitate effective use of the technology to learn the content in these lessons. An effective way to develop technical skills in content‐based lessons is to teach technical skills in increments from simple to complex through a series of content tasks. For example, in the Language Arts unit on media literacy, in a first lesson, students would learn how to complete a one‐frame comic to illustrate one idea or thought, where simple features of the tool (e.g., Comic Life) are introduced. In the next lesson, the content task could be creating a comic with a storyline that involves more than one idea or thought. As part of this second task, students would learn advanced or additional features of the tool.

219

Kamini Jaipal Jamani and Candace Figg

Figure 3: Implementation characteristics of TPK‐in‐Practice 4.3.3 TPK‐inPractice: implementation—modeling technology use to and for students This characteristic involves several modeling actions that teachers can incorporate into their instructional practices.

Model best practices for technology tool use. While teaching the tools within a content‐based lesson, teachers model correct use of tools. For example, when designing slides in a slideshow, the teacher models how to select an appropriate color and size for the font so that it contrasts with the background color and can be seen at a distance.

Model generic functions across applications. Knowledge of some of the generic features that are found in multiple applications can facilitate use of technology. For example, the teacher introduces a new tool by showing functions that are similar to other more familiar tools, such as introducing the Symbol Palette in Inspiration and comparing that to the Gallery Toolbar in Smart Ideas.

Use teacher‐created exemplars. Teachers provide examples of completed technology enhanced products similar to those students will be expected to create. For example, the teacher provides students with an example of a completed flowchart so that students can visualize the final product they create.

Have students’ model technical skills. Teacher knowledge about how to engage students in modeling their own technical skills was found to be important. Our research indicated that teachers used various techniques, including asking student helpers to set up the technology or assist throughout the lesson, to engage students with the technology used in the lesson. For example, assigning student helpers to calibrate the SMART Board prior to the lesson, or use the SMART Board throughout the lesson to demonstrate how to activate commands was an effective strategy for students to model technical skills.

220

Kamini Jaipal Jamani and Candace Figg

4.4 Limitations of the framework of TPACK‐in‐Practice The Framework of TPACK‐in‐Practice identifies teacher characteristics and actions that were identified from elementary teachers’ teaching practice across a variety of subjects. The framework is a work in progress and there may be other characteristics and actions leading to successful technology‐enhanced instruction that have yet to be identified. It should also be noted that the characteristics of TPCK‐in‐Practice and TCK‐in‐ Practice are not reflected in concrete teacher actions, as they illustrate teacher thinking processes occurring as the teacher plans and implements technology‐enhanced instruction. We also believe that the characteristics identified are fairly general, and can be applied across grade levels for both novice and experienced teachers. In the next section, we illustrate how the TPACK‐in‐Practice framework can be used to inform the design of technology workshops for teachers and higher education faculty.

5. The TPACK‐in‐Practice workshop approach The implementation of the Framework of TPACK‐in‐Practice (Figg & Burson 2011) with pre‐service teachers contributed to the identification of a sequence of experiences to support teachers’ transfer of knowledge learned in technology workshops into their classroom practice. These four experiences include: (a) facilitator modeling a technology‐enhanced activity type (learning with the tool) to set the context and purpose for tool use, (b) participants engaging in ‘pedagogical dialogue’ about the modeled activity, (c) facilitator using short tool demonstrations to develop TK (in context), and (d) participants applying acquired technical skills and knowledge in additional practice tasks using the same activity type (Figg & Jaipal 2012; Jaipal & Figg 2012). These four elements are demonstrated in the TPACK‐in‐Practice Workshop approach through four sequential workshop stages: 1) modeling a tech‐enhanced activity type, 2) integrating pedagogical dialogue, 3) tool demonstration with TechSlam, and 4) practice task using the tool. The four stages, sequenced from the base of the pyramid upwards, are illustrated in Figure 4.

Figure 4: The TPACK‐in Practice workshop approach

5.1 Modeling a tech‐enhanced activity type The first experience in a TPACK‐in‐Practice workshop (see Figure 4) provides participants with the context of how the tool is used in classroom instruction. The workshop facilitator models how the tool is used in instruction by modeling an activity type (TPCK‐in‐Practice), such as those suggested by Harris and Hofer (2009), Hofer and Harris (2010), and Harris et al. (2010). Modelling helps workshop participants’ visualize how learners use the tools in a specific learning context. For example, the opening activity of a workshop on using Virtual Field Trips would be to have participants use a virtual field trip for learning purposes in a particular content area (TCK‐in‐Practice).

5.2 Integrating ‘pedagogical dialogue’ This segment of the workshop involves a discussion period in which participants learn about how the tool is used in practice; dialogue is critical to promote understanding of the pedagogy, content, and technology being modeled (Angeli 2005). This conversation enlightens novice teachers about the connections between the

221

Kamini Jaipal Jamani and Candace Figg modeled activity and the decisions teachers make in designing and implementing technology‐enhanced activities (TPK‐in‐Practice) in practice. Specifically, the workshop participants work together in small groups, and then contribute to whole group discussion about the following:

TPCK‐in Practice: What is the structure of the activity? What tools are appropriate for this activity? In what types of lessons (e.g., Direct Instruction, Inquiry, Project‐based, Problem‐based, Collaborative Grouping Jigsaw) will this type of activity be most effective?

TCK‐in‐Practice: How would this activity be adapted for content areas? What other tools could be used for this activity?

TPK‐in‐Practice: What implementation strategies work most effectively for this activity? What does the teacher need to plan/prepare ahead of time? What classroom management issues need to be addressed?

5.3 Tool demonstration with TechSlam In this third stage of the workshop, participants develop activity‐specific technical skills (TK in context) through short tool demonstrations done by the workshop facilitator. In our Virtual Field Trip workshop, the facilitator would instruct participants in the technical skills required to develop their own Virtual Field Trip (e.g., setting up a wiki or blog with links). Research also indicates that short, frequent training sessions that are sustained over time support teachers’ integration of technology into instruction (Carlson 2002; Grunwald & Associates 2010; McKenzie 2001; Wei et al. 2009); therefore, the tool demonstration activity provides directions for the completion of a few technical skills as well as how to integrate those skills into instruction. The workshop instructor can provide a web page, called a TECHSlam, containing additional examples for how the tech‐ enhanced activity could be used in different teaching contexts and content areas via links to tutorials for using the tool, and a resource area with links to how teachers are using the tool across content areas.

5.4 Practice task using the technology In the last stage of the workshop, participants apply their knowledge of TPACK‐in‐Practice to design their own task similar to the one modeled in stage 1. For example, participants in the Virtual Field Trip workshop will use the TPACK‐in‐Practice knowledge learned in the workshop to design their own Virtual Field Trip.

6. Conclusion The Framework of TPACK‐in‐Practice identifies the teacher actions and characteristics of teacher knowledge contributing to successful technology‐enhanced teaching. The framework extends the TPACK literature by highlighting three TPACK knowledge components essential for planning and implementing technology‐ enhanced lessons in practice: TPCK‐in‐Practice, TCK‐in‐Practice and TPK‐in‐practice. Grounded in the latter three components, the TPACK‐in‐Practice Workshop approach is a guide for designing technology professional learning experiences that are content‐centric—promoting the development of teacher knowledge about how to teach with technology. This workshop approach can be used in a variety of professional learning contexts such as pre‐service teacher education courses, in‐service teacher workshops, and technology workshops for college and university faculty. Preliminary findings of a study being conducted by the authors indicate that the modeling activities and reflective experiences in the TPACK‐in‐Practice Workshop approach promote the development of knowledge about how to teach with technology that is transferable into instructional practice settings. Designing professional development technology workshops using the TPACK‐in‐Practice Workshop approach will enable teachers to leave technology workshops with knowledge to teach WITH the technology rather than just acquire the technical skills to use the technology, as is promoted in the traditional technology skills‐training workshops. The theoretical approaches in this paper contribute to the paradigm shift from teaching the tool to thinking of how to teach WITH the tool—technology‐enhanced teaching.

References Angeli, C. (2005) “Transforming a Teacher Education Method Course through Technology: Effects on Preservice Teachers' Technology Competency”, Computers and Education, Vol 45, No. 4, pp 383‐398. Angeli, C. and Valanides, N. (2009) “Epistemological and Methodological Issues for the Conceptualization, Development, and Assessment of ICT‐TPCK: Advances in Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK)”, Computers & Education, Vol 52, No. 1, pp 154‐168. Carlson, S. (2002) “The missing link”. TechKnowLogia, October/December, pp 7‐11. Figg, C. and Burson, J. (2011) A Handy Guide for Teaching and Learning with Technology: Designs for Unpacking Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK), Lulu, North Carolina.

222

Kamini Jaipal Jamani and Candace Figg Figg, C. and Jaipal, K. (2009) “Unpacking TPACK: TPK Characteristics Supporting Successful Implementation”, Proceedings of the 20th International Conference of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education, pp 4069‐4073, Association for Advancement of Computing in Education, Chesapeake, Virginia. Creswell, J.W. (2005) Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research, Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. Figg, C. and Jaipal, K. (2011) “Developing a Survey from a Taxonomy of Characteristics for TK, TCK, and TPK to Assess Teacher Candidates’ Knowledge of Teaching with Technology”. Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2011, pp 4330‐4339), Association for Advancement of Computing in Education, Chesapeake, Virginia. Figg, C. and Jaipal, K. (2012) “TPACK‐in‐Practice: Developing 21st Century Teacher Knowledge”, Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2012, pp 4683‐4689, Association for Advancement of Computing in Education, Chesapeake, Virginia. Fisher, C., Dwyer, D. C., and Yocam, K. (Eds.) (1996) Education and Technology: Reflections on computing in classrooms. Jossey‐Bass, San Francisco. Grunwald and Associates, Inc. (2010) “Educators, Technology and 21st Century Skills: Dispelling Five Myths: A Study on the Connection Between K–12 Technology Use and 21st Century Skills”, [online], Walden University, http://www.grunwald.com/pdfs/Educators_Technology_21stCentury‐Skills_GRUNWALD‐WALDEN_Report.pdf. Harris, J. (2005) “Our Agenda for Technology Integration: It’s Time to Choose. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, Vol 5, No. 2, [online], www.citejournal.org/articles/v5i2editorial1.pdf. Harris, J. B. and Hofer, M. (2009) “Instructional Planning Activity Types as Vehicles for Curriculum Based TPACK Development”, In Maddux, C. D. (Ed), Research Highlights in Technology and Teacher Education 2009, pp 99‐108, Association for Advancement of Computing in Education, Chesapeake, Virginia. Harris, J. B., Mishra, P. and Koehler, M. J. (2007) “Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Curriculum‐ based Technology Integration Reframed”, Paper presented at the 2007 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), Chicago, Illinois, March. Harris, J. B., Mishra, P. and Koehler, M. (2009) “Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Curriculum‐based Technology Integration Reframed”, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, Vol 41, No. 4, pp 393‐416. Hofer, M. and Harris, J. (2010) “Differentiating TPACK Development: Using Learning Activity Types with In‐service and Preservice Teachers”, In D. Gibson and B. Dodge (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2010, pp. 3857‐3864, Association for Advancement of Computing in Education, Chesapeake, Virginia. Jaipal, K. and Figg, C. (2010a) “Expanding the Practice‐based Taxonomy of Characteristics of TPACK”, Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2010, pp. 3868‐3875, Association for Advancement of Computing in Education, Chesapeake, Virginia. Jaipal, K. and Figg, C. (2010b) “Unpacking the “Total PACKage”: Emergent TPACK characteristics from a Study of Preservice Teachers Teaching with Technology”, Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 415‐441. Jaipal, K. and Figg, C. (2012) “Using the TPACK‐in‐Practice Framework to Design Technology Professional Learning for Teachers”, Paper presented at the 2012 Annual Canadian Society for the Study of Education, Waterloo, Canada, May. Lee, C. and Kim, C. (2011) "A TPACK‐Based Instructional Design Model for a Technology Integration Course", Paper presented at the annual meeting of the AECT International Convention, The Galt House, Louisville, KY, Oct 30, 2012. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p574864_index.html McKenzie, J. (2001) “How Teachers Learn Technology Best”, The Educational Technology Journal, Vol 10, No. 6, [online], http://fno.org/mar01/howlearn.html. Means, B. and Olson, K. (1997) “Technology and Education Reform”, [online], U.S. Department of Education, http://www.ed.gov/pubs/SER/Technology/title.html Mishra, P. and Koehler, M. (2006) “Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge”, Teachers College Record, Vol 108, No. 6, pp 1017–1054. Papert, S. (1987) “A Critique of Technocentrism in Thinking about the School of the Future”, [online], http://www.papert.org/articles/ACritiqueofTechnocentrism.html. Roblyer, M. D., Edwards, J. and Havriluk, M. A. (1997) Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching, Merrill, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. Shulman, L. S. (1986) “Those who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching”, Educational Researcher, Vol 15, No. 2, pp 4‐14. Shulman, L. S. (1987) “Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform”, Harvard Educational Review, Vol 57, No. 1, pp 1–22. So, H. and Kim, B. (2009) “Learning about problem based learning: Student teacher integrating technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge”, Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp 101‐116. Wei, R. C., Darling‐Hammond, L., Andree, A., Richardson, N. and Orphanos, S. (2009), Professional Learning in the Learning Profession: A Status Report on Teacher Development in the United States and Abroad. National Staff Development Council, Dallas, Texas. st Williams, M.K., Foulger, T.S. and Wetzel, K. (2009) “Preparing preservice teachers for 21 century classrooms: Transforming attitudes and behaviors about innovative technology”, Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, Vol 17, No. 3, pp 393‐418.

223

Lessons Learnt: Building a Foundation for e‐Learning in Medical Education in Botswana Masego Kebaetse, Cecil Haverkamp and Oathokwa Nkomazana University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana masego.kebaetse@mopipi.ub.bw haverkamp.ubotswana@gmail.com nkomazanao@mopipi.ub.bw Abstract: The University of Botswana School of Medicine (UB SOM) enrolled its first class of 36 medical students in August 2009. The first two residency programmes in Paediatrics and Internal Medicine were launched in January 2010, followed by a Family Medicine residency programme in 2011 at two distant rural sites in Mahalapye and Maun. E‐learning was adopted as a vehicle to support this de‐centralised medical education at UB SOM. When UB SOM received a generous grant from the US government, the Medical Education Partnership Initiative (MEPI) in September 2010, a significant portion of the funding was invested in infrastructure and other resources to support the implementation of e‐learning at the School. This paper reviews the preliminary experience and lessons from the implementation of e‐learning at UB SOM. Drawing from the values of UB SOM’s community‐based PBL curriculum, three elements have emerged as guiding principles for technology integration: access to information, interactive collaboration, and contextualised learning. To ensure sustainability, stakeholders, including faculty, students, several university units, and other external partners and stakeholders were engaged early and regularly. The authors identify critical elements that were engaged in the implementation of e‐learning. In addition to obvious issues related technology integration, the authors suggest that pro‐active involvement of stakeholders, and flexibility and openness about the process are crucial to successful technology integration. In fact, while the technical challenges of integrating new technologies are real, significant challenges can arise from neglecting or failing to engage diverse partners and stakeholders, and engaging relevant expertise to ensure that the benefits of the technology can be shared and sustained. Keywords: e‐learning, m‐learning, m‐health, medical education, tablets, technology integration, ICT, sustainability

1. Introduction The promise of technology The use of technology to enhance learning is not a new undertaking, and the potential benefits of technology integration (improved motivation, enhanced instructional methods, increased productivity, and information age skills) have been well documented (Roblyer & Doering, 2010). Saettler (1990) notes that early references of technology integration, at least in the USA, date as far back as the early twentieth century. Over the decades, as information communication technologies (ICT) have emerged and come of age in the marketplace, many have sooner or later found themselves in the classroom. These include radio in the 1930’s, television in the 1950’s, and personal computers in the late 1970’s and 1980’s, among others (Reiser & Dempsey, 2007; Roblyer & Doering, 2010). The end of the twentieth century saw the explosion of the internet and networked computing combined with the use of personal hand held devices such as cellular phones, tablets and mini laptops. In spite of the fact that the adoption of emerging technologies has almost always fallen short of expectations (Reiser & Dempsey, 2007), there has nonetheless been increasing use of technology in the classroom (Reiser & Dempsey, 2007; Roblyer & Doering, 2010; Tiene & Ingram, 2001). As a wide array of technologies has become available for the classroom, e‐learning has also made inroads in medical education (Sandars, 2012; Ruiz, Mintzer & Leipzig, 2006; Association of Medical Colleges, 2007). This is not just in North America, Europe and industrialised nations but increasingly in developing nations including the young UB SOM. Considering the dispersed nature of UB SOM’s clinical sites, the potential benefits of e‐ learning were obvious and the decision to include e‐learning a relatively straight forward one. At the same time, in light of the newness of UB SOM and its clinical sites as teaching hospitals, the implementation of e‐ learning has to be broader than just technology to include thinking strategically at designing adequate teaching and learning spaces of which technology becomes an element. For instance, in notoriously busy and frantic clinical environments with hectic on‐call schedules and shifts, quiet study spaces, adequate furnishings, and even storage facilities for learners to safeguard personal belongings during ward rounds are invaluable. Our context: Medical education in Botswana

224

Masego Kebaetse, Cecil Haverkamp and Oathokwa Nkomazana Botswana is a landlocked country in Southern Africa with a population of about 2 million people. Since independence the government of Botswana has invested significant national resources in the healthcare sector. Currently, Botswana has a universal healthcare system where care is free for every citizen at government facilities with an affordable co‐pay. Additionally, the government has sponsored medical doctors and other healthcare professionals to study abroad to build a qualified healthcare workforce. Nonetheless, the shortage of health workers, specifically of medical doctors, has been identified as a major concern. This led to a Presidential Directive in 1998 of establishing the country’s first and only School of Medicine based at the University of Botswana. Initially, UB SOM curriculum implementation foresaw a phased process in which undergraduate students completed pre‐medical training at the University of Botswana and the rest of their training at partner schools outside of Botswana. In August 2009, however, UB SOM enrolled its first class of medical students who will complete all phases of their medical training at the University of Botswana. At present, UB SOM has enrolled four undergraduate cohorts and is expected to graduate its inaugural class in 2014. Additionally, there are about 60 post‐graduate trainees – mostly Batswana doctors with medical degrees from outside of Botswana who are enrolled in several UB SOM graduate (MMed) programmes. In line with broader international trends and in response to reviews of medical education approaches, UB SOM considered and opted for a problem‐ based learning (PBL) framework and philosophy as a way of delivering the curriculum to matches the health care needs and characteristics of medical practice in Botswana. Another equally important underlying characteristic of the UB SOM medical curriculum is its community‐ orientation. In agreement with the Ministry of Health, UB SOM selected four clinical teaching sites: two rural sites in Maun and Mahalapye as home to the new Family Medicine Programme (which trains post‐graduate and undergraduate learners); Sbrana Hospital, the nation’s only referral psychiatric hospital based in Lobatse; and Princess Marina Hospital as the nation’s largest tertiary referral hospital in Gaborone. While the government ownership of these hospitals guarantees continuous provision of clinical care, these were not designed as teaching hospitals and as such lack the kind of facilities that would make for a conducive learning environment. Following the decision for community‐based clinical teaching at these sites, significant investments were and continue to be required to turn these clinical sites into effective teaching and learning sites. From the early days of UB SOM, e‐learning was identified as one complementary vehicle for supporting learning in such decentralised locations. Considerable investments to ensure internet access, functional e‐ learning technologies, adequate library resources, and stimulating learning spaces, among others, were made. Considering that massive funding by the Botswana Government was already invested in scholarships for all Batswana medical students, new facilities at the University, and salaries for staff at the new School, UB SOM sought additional external funding to transform the rural clinical environments into effective and efficient teaching and learning sites. In 2009, UB SOM received a grant under the U.S. Government’s President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) to provide limited internet access at Princess Marina Hospital, Mahalapye District Hospital, and Letsholathebe II Hospital in Maun, as well as to purchase printers and computers. In addition to the 2009 PEPFAR grant, in 2010 UB SOM was awarded an even more generous grant from the US government under the Medical Education Partnership Initiative (MEPI). This grant offered an opportunity to fund the full implementation of an e‐learning agenda at the School. Since 2012, the MEPI grant has provided funding to procure and install information technology infrastructure and instructional technologies for the purpose of supporting effective and efficient teaching and learning environments for students, trainees and faculty at clinical sites. Among the e‐learning investments made so far is the establishment and expansion of internet infrastructure, especially wifi internet access at hospitals. This internet expansion is necessary for the integration of video conferencing technologies, interactive boards, and tablets. Collectively, the various technologies are meant to provide seamless access to learning resources and support collaborative learning. Additionally, the MEPI grant has provided the necessary human resources to support academic staff, trainees and residents in various teaching and learning opportunities. To complement existing expertise at the broader University and ensure successful implementation of the e‐learning agenda, additional expertise was secured in the form of a full‐time position for an instructional designer, temporary support from a project implementation consultant, mobile technology developers, and telemedicine experts.

225

Masego Kebaetse, Cecil Haverkamp and Oathokwa Nkomazana

2. Our process: Elements of effective technology integration (process) Technology integration is not just about the tools one needs to use; it is a complex process that includes people, processes, securing and managing instructional and non‐instructional resources, and analysis of learning and performance problems among others (Reiser & Dempsey, 2007). At UB SOM, we sought to engage in several processes simultaneously to ensure successful integration: a) grounding technology choices in learning theory and curriculum values, b) identifying and engaging critical stakeholders early and regularly, c) identifying and providing appropriate support for the e‐learning agenda, and d) thinking about sustainability early in the process. Clearly additional elements will emerge as the implementation process progresses. Ground technology choices in learning theory and curriculum values Ultimately, the technologies chosen have to integrate effectively with and support the curriculum. In light of the cost of technology (human and financial) and the ever‐changing ICT landscape, effective implementation of an e‐learning agenda makes the most sense when it is grounded in learning theory. In fact, Sandars (2012) argues that “the focus of any educational intervention should be the learner” (p. 534). Drawing from the established values of UB SOM’s community‐based PBL curriculum, three themes have become guiding principles for our e‐learning agenda: access to information, interactive collaboration, and contextualised learning. The ultimate e‐learning environment for UB SOM as it emerges will be one in which the ICT allows learners and academic staff to access learning resources regardless of their location, to collaborate easily across sites using multiple platforms, and to learn in the context of clinical practice – both on and away from UB campus. Identify and engage critical stakeholders early and regularly Initially, SOM had to identify critical stakeholders to ensure successful implementation of the e‐learning agenda. In July of 2012, there was a MEPI symposium to which various stakeholders were invited. These stakeholders were strategically selected from the Ministry of Health (MOH) and included personnel from clinical sites, Ministry of Education and Skills Development (MOE & SD), and UB. This was an opportunity to share the vision and progress on the MEPI grant. Although the symposium was not primarily about e‐learning, it was an important opportunity to build relationships and share the vision of UB SOM’s e‐learning agenda. Currently, we have been actively engaged with five stakeholders: UB Information Technology department (UB IT), UB Library, hospital superintendents, UB Business Services, and students and faculty. Clearly as we implement other aspects of our e‐learning agenda, other stakeholders will become important. Identify and provide appropriate support for the e‐learning agenda In addition to stakeholders, we had to secure specialised support for our various projects in the form of partners and personnel. Having analysed the skills and resources needed for our various projects, we proceeded to seek the necessary expertise. At UB SOM this has meant securing an instructional designer, a logistics consultant, a telecommunications partner, and a mobile health partner. The instructional design specialist leads the technology integration process, supports students and faculty in matters of teaching and learning with technology, and ensures that technology procurement continues to be grounded in learning theory and curriculum values. The logistics consultant works with the instructional designer on procurement and stakeholder relationship building. The University of Pennsylvania, through its local office, The Botswana‐ University of Pennsylvania Partnership (BUP), has been a crucial mobile health expert partner providing leadership on the tablet project (m‐Learning Initiative). Through this partnership we also acquired four other support partners for the initiative: a) Orange Botswana, a telecommunication provider b) 3G Mobile, an authorised Samsung c) Mangoes Mobile, a US based consulting company that provided set‐up support and user analytics for the tablets, and d) LetMeRepair, a Samsung authorised repair company. The relationship with BUP is a long‐standing one in which BUP has led the collaborative research with UB SOM and Orange Botswana into the appropriate mobile device and data package for the m‐Learning Initiative. Think about sustainability early in the process

226

Masego Kebaetse, Cecil Haverkamp and Oathokwa Nkomazana At a broader level there needs to be conversations at the UB SOM and around the university support structures in general to ensure that the investments made during the grant are a stable part of the processes of the University as the grant draws to an end. Currently, we have chosen to engage with stakeholders and partners early and regularly to ensure they understand our vision and needs, and that they have buy‐in for the technologies they will ultimately be responsible for maintaining and supporting now that equipment has been purchased. The plan for sustainability does not only involve ensuring that University departments become responsible for continued maintenance and support of technologies, it also involves assuming more responsibilities for projects that were initially supported by outside partners. For instance, while the procurement and configuration of tablets was initially conducted by BUP, we have gradually shifted procurement, configuration and support of the tablets to the Distance Learning Unit at UB SOM. Additionally, we have to think creatively about funding technologies that need continuous replenishment. At the request of the Distance Learning Specialist and the Logistics Consultant, a team of undergraduate students will be working with the m‐Learning Initiative implementation team to explore models that are most realistic to students. In the future we expect to assemble a similar team of post‐graduate learners in order to look for a sustainability model for them.

3. Current outcomes of the process (results) In this section we highlight some of the outcomes we have experienced from our process. Among other things stakeholder engagement has paid off in the services, resources (e.g. learning spaces), and leadership provided. Our internet expansion is completed at all four clinical sites. Our m‐Learning Initiative is underway and to date we have allocated 165 of the original 170 devices with users receiving training at the time of receiving the tablet. We realise that other successes will continue to emerge since we are at the beginning stages of our implementation process. Stakeholder buy‐in and engagement One of the underlying themes of our process has been that although deciding on and procuring technologies can be challenging and time‐consuming, the bigger challenges lies in developing and managing relationships that allow for achievement of the e‐learning agenda. Engaging critical stakeholders (internal and external) early in the implementation process has proven beneficial to ensuring shared vision and ownership. It has allowed UB SOM to distribute costs and capitalise on existing resources in and out of the university. In the case of UB units, allowing such strategic units to take leadership and/or significant roles in projects related to their areas of expertise has proven to be invaluable. This has ensured that such units understand the vision of the e‐ learning agenda and therefore include the various projects in their routine processes in terms of support, maintenance, and future budgetary needs. Two UB units in particular are worth noting even this early in the process: UB IT and UB Library. Internet expansion As already indicated, through the leadership of the IT department, UB SOM has engaged in an internet expansion from the main campus to the four clinical sites. Internet accessibility is now functional at all clinical sites. The IT team has assessed UB SOM’s various teaching and learning spaces, advised on appropriate solutions, and taken the lead on the tendering process. Once vendors were selected, they worked tirelessly with external providers to install and configure internet access at the clinical sites. Additionally, they reviewed specifications and followed up with vendors for more complex equipment such as interactive boards and video conferencing equipment. An important aspect of this collaboration is that the IT department have assumed responsibility for equipment maintenance and future support contracts in ways that UB SOM would never have been able to manage independently. The m‐Learning Initiative Through the m‐Learning Initiative, learners and faculty receive 7” tablets for use during clinical rotations. The devices run on the Android 4.0.3 Ice Cream Sandwich operating system. The selection of this particular device followed a multi‐year pilot in partnership our primary technical partner and m‐health expert, BUP. In collaboration with Orange Botswana, BUP explored the use of smart phones and tablets to support medical education using UB SOM residents and faculty as their population. Based on the results of the study, we

227

Masego Kebaetse, Cecil Haverkamp and Oathokwa Nkomazana sought a device that would be affordable in this part of the world and easy to carry around in a hospital setting. In addition to a robust collection of medical applications and research databases (e.g. Epocrates, Medscape, uCentral, PubMed mobile, EBSCOhost, DuoChart TSN), the tablets also have a collection of various healthcare guidelines and protocols for Botswana. Faculty and learners generally use the tablets in the wifi areas at the clinical sites. Through the partnership with Orange Botswana, users will receive SIM cards to provide seamless access to the internet outside the wifi accessible areas. The package provided by Orange Botswana is a customised product tailored to need of UB SOM. The highly subsidised package will provide tablet users with 200MB of data per month/per user and a closed user group to allow for free calls among the tablet users. Additionally, Orange Botswana will provide a closed user group to allow for free calls within the community of users. We expect the SIM cards to be ready in the next few months. To date we have distributed 169 tablets to clinical teaching faculty, undergraduate learners in the clinical phase, and 19 post‐graduate learners outside Gaborone. The preliminary informal feedback has been positive. We are currently in the process of ordering an additional 65 tablets that would be allocated to our post‐ graduate learners at Princes Marina Hospital. At the time of tablet allocation, users receive training on the general use of the device and the use of the medical and research resources. In the first few months of the m‐ Learning Initiative, we expect the use of tablets to focus on accessing medical resources. Once tablets have been used for several months, we will provide additional training to faculty and learners on communication and collaborative learning tools and techniques. The UB Library has been a critical partner in support of the m‐Learning Initiative. In collaboration with BUP, UB Library led the process of identifying and testing library databases, medical apps, and resources for the tablets. In fact, the senior librarian for the Faculty of Health Sciences, of which UB SOM is a part, interned at Penn Biomedical Library and consequently brought invaluable expertise on mobile medical resources to UB Library and UB SOM. Both the senior librarian and the technical librarian have been instrumental in developing and facilitating the necessary training for tablet users. The support of senior library management cannot be underestimated, since ultimately they have used their positions to provide both the financial and human resources needed to support the m‐Learning Initiative. Learning spaces As previously indicated, UB SOM needed teaching and learning spaces at each hospital. Superintendents at these clinical sites have become critical partners in ensuring that UB SOM secures adequate space for teaching and learning. In the midst of sometimes paralysing Ministry of Health and UB bureaucracies, they found creative ways to provide invaluable space for UB SOM learners at hospitals where space is a rare commodity. This has allowed UB SOM to establish Learning Resource Centres (LRCs) at three of the teaching sites (Maun, Mahalapye and Lobatse).The LRCs become hubs where complementary coaching and learning can occur as an extension of bedside learning. Each LRC is internet accessible and has a small library with both quiet and collaborative learning spaces; a smart PBL room slated to have an interactive board and video conferencing equipment; academic staff offices; and resident and trainee learning spaces. Additionally, each LRC will also have a small storage closet to secure loaner laptops, projectors, and cameras that academic staff and learners can use for academic and professional work outside the LRCs. Even at the tertiary hospital, where access to space is close to impossible, space has been made accessible at the Library and other places across the hospital. Besides making space available, another important aspect of support from the hospital superintendents has been their willingness to make provision for IT staff at their institutions to provide limited support to UB SOM where the university does not have IT personnel on the ground. At two of the hospitals where UB IT has no daily presence, MOH IT personnel act as the first line of support for technology support. They have access to UB wifi and tablets. Overall, each hospital superintendent has been an active champion for UB SOM through the services they have provided and the opportunities they have made possible.

228

Masego Kebaetse, Cecil Haverkamp and Oathokwa Nkomazana

4. Reflecting on our process (discussion) Procurement of technologies might be the easiest part of the technology integration process provided funds are available. Nonetheless, procurement does not imply effective integration either in terms of a functional process or desirable teaching and learning outcomes. Ideally, one would develop a comprehensive technology implementation plan to ensure procurement of appropriate technologies and establishment of relevant process and support systems. In our cases, however, we procured and implemented technologies even as we navigated processes and developed an elearning agenda that will ultimately guide our implementation process. Although we have not yet fully articulated our e‐learning agenda, we are at a time of great opportunity, thinking creatively about a process that would support adoption and integration. Even as we have experienced some successes, we have also faced some challenges and unexpected detours. The process has been dynamic; sometimes we meet unexpected delays and roadblocks but sometimes new opportunities. For instance, the procurement and installation process in particular has been slower than we had anticipated. In this section, we highlight some of the challenges we have faced and the lessons we have learned from those challenges. The process can be slow and tedious The procurement process has taken much longer than we expected. UB SOM, as a young school that needs to be agile and dynamic to survive, regularly finds itself caught in the midst of two and sometimes three (MOH, MOE & SD, and UB) bureaucracies in which the red tape can at times seem insurmountable. Although Business Services has been very supportive, both in working against tight deadlines and accommodating UB SOM needs in the midst of rigid university procedures, the process has been at times painfully slow and time consuming for all parties involved. If the e‐learning agenda is to be successful, one has to navigate institutional politics and systems with wisdom and discernment. This includes educating oneself about policies and procedures and learning how the different units one needs to be successful function. Expectations and the overall narrative can be challenging to manage While there are tangible developments targeted to improve the learning climate (e.g. lockers, desks, study spaces, and most significantly internet access), undergraduate students have tended to focus exclusively on the m‐Learning Initiative. They seemed to overlook all other developments and in the process lobbied the m‐ learning implementation team tirelessly to ensure that they would receive tablets. Once tablets were received and users began to experience the benefits of the tablets, using them in wifi areas in the LRCs was not enough and they started to lobby for SIM cards so they would have internet access away from the wifi accessible points. Although sometimes elusive, managing expectations associated with implementation of an e‐learning agenda is an important aspect of a successful implementation. In the era of Facebook and text messaging, one could quickly lose control of the message and consequently the vision of the project. Implementation is always a dynamic process Due to unforeseen circumstances, we finished the previous fiscal year with funds that needed to be spent prior to the commencement of the new fiscal year. Instead of gradually deploying the various technologies that are part of our learning agenda and coupling the roll‐out with training to ensure higher adoption, we had to procure most of the technologies at the same time. This means that we will have some technologies purchased and installed (e.g. video conferencing) before we have the time to plan and prepare for effective adoption and integration. A developmental approach to procurement would have been easier to manage and more likely to increase adoption of the various technologies. To be successful however, one has to be able to adapt to situations beyond one’s control and rethink the implementation process, adoption plan and training priorities. Student and faculty training and support are crucial It is not enough to make technology available; we must also provide the necessary support for faculty and learners to adopt and integrate technology effectively. We are currently working on a plan to outline our strategy for e‐learning support and development. For faculty, support will include both pedagogical and technological support and development. For students, support and development will include technological and

229

Masego Kebaetse, Cecil Haverkamp and Oathokwa Nkomazana pedagogical training to ensure effective and engaged learning. In particular, students need to acquire and/or improve self‐directed metacognitive skills that will enable them to be successful lifelong learners. In addition to support, faculty and students are important stakeholders, since e‐learning integration is implemented for the benefit of their teaching and learning. Given the opportunity students and faculty have provided input into how the use of technology would be most beneficial. For instance, in one of the informal meetings with residents at one of the clinical sites, they commented on the preference for the use of video conferencing to support collaborative learning instead of tele‐lecturing. Students have provided feedback on the m‐Learning Initiative and the feedback prompted us to commit to allocating individual tablets to third‐year students instead of loaning them tablets only when they were in rural rotations.

5. Conclusion Despite the considerable technical challenges, financial and time costs around technology selection, procurement and installation, technology continues to make inroads in medical education. The integration of such technologies is not always straightforward, especially at a young medical school where there can be so many other competing challenges. Ideally, it would have been preferable to develop a cohesive implementation plan before commencing with procurement. Nonetheless we have had to implement some technologies even as we develop a plan for moving forward. Navigating this situation has warranted being reflective, flexible, and adaptable. Clearly the experiences described are preliminary and the implementation processes is in its early stages. At times, the broader institutional processes required for e‐learning integration at a curriculum and conceptual level have been slow, time consuming, and challenging. Nonetheless, some successes are emerging as are some challenges. Nurturing strong strategic partnerships and relationships is paying off in ownership and support for our projects. This is imperative to a sustainable and successful e‐ learning agenda. Additionally, providing adequate support processes through partners and personnel is important for technologies to be adopted effectively.

Acknowledgements UB SOM’s e‐learning initiative is supported by the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief’s (PEPFAR) Medical Education Partnership Initiative (MEPI) though the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA).

References Association of Medical Colleges 2007. Effective use of educational technology in medical education. Association of American Medical Colleges Institute for Improving Medical Education. Reiser, RA & Dempsey, JV 2007, Trends and issues in instructional design and technology, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. Roblyer, MD & Doering, AH 2010, Integrating educational technology, 5th edn, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. Ruiz, JG, Leipzig, RM, & Mintzer, MJ 2006, ‘The impact of e‐learning in medical education’, Academic Medicine, vol. 84, no. 3, pp. 207‐212. Saettler, P 1990, The evolution of American educational technology, McGraw‐Hill, New York. Sandars, J 2012, ‘Technology and the delivery of the curriculum of the future: Opportunities and challenges’, Medical Teacher, vol. 34, pp. 534‐538. Tiene, D & Ingram, A 2001, Exploring current issues in educational technology, McGraw‐Hill Companies, Inc., Boston, MA.

230

Awareness Learning is a Function of Educational Technology in e‐ Learning Simon Bheki Khoza Curriculum Studies & Educational Technology, School of Education, University of KwaZulu‐ Natal, Durban, South Africa khozas@ukzn.ac.za Abstract: The two commonly used e‐learning discussion resources (chat room and discussion forum) have been dominating E‐learning environments for a long time before they were joined by the two commonly used Web 2.0 resources (Facebook and Blogs). These four e‐learning resources are commonly used in e‐learning environments and as such they have been the main issue of contestation in e‐learning environments as they represent Technology in Education (TIE), while Technology of Education (TOE) is either not represented or oppressed. Therefore, this paper is visiting some studies that are trying to promote these e‐learning resources in the form of Technology in Education at the expanse of Technology of Education. As a result one solution may be to replace Convenient Learning with Awareness Learning in any e‐learning environment. Keywords: e‐learning, e‐learning resources, technology in education, technology of education, convenient learning and awareness learning

1. Introduction This paper defines e‐learning as an electronic learning; that refers to the use of any of the World Wide Web resources in teaching and learning environments. This also includes the Web 2.0 resources. E‐learning has been used interchangeably with online teaching and learning in this paper. “Any person or thing that communicates learning becomes a teaching and learning resource” (Khoza 2012:75). E‐learning Educational Technology (ET) resources, like off‐line Educational Technology resources, are divided into Technology in Education (TIE) and Technology of Education (TOE) (Percival and Ellington 1988). TIE is any teaching / learning resource that one can see and touch. TOE is any teaching / learning resource that one cannot see and touch. TIE is further divided into hardware and software. Hardware is any machine or tool used in teaching and learning, but in terms of online teaching and learning they are used to access the internet (e.g. desktop computers, laptops, cellular phones and others). Hardware is the same for both online and off‐line contexts. Software is any material that is produced in order for the hardware to display information or communicate learning (e.g. for off‐line transparencies, for Overhead Projector, or for online PowerPoint slides and others). This suggests that while the hardware component is the same for both the online and off‐line teaching and learning, the software component is not directly the same. For example, one can see and touch the transparencies but one can only see the PowerPoint slides and cannot touch them unless one prints them. This means that almost all online software resources are different from the off‐line version because one can see them but can only touch them if they are reproduced as a hard copy. On the other hand almost all the off‐line software components are provided in the form of hard copies. TOE, also known as ‘ideological‐ware’ of teaching and learning resources, is almost the same for both the online and off‐line contexts (e.g. teaching / learning strategies, theories of teaching / learning, research findings, facilitator’s competencies and others). In both the online and off‐line contexts, one cannot see and touch these TOE resources. Therefore, the next section will be opening a discourse around the four commonly used online teaching and learning resources. These online resources are discussed under TIE and TOE. Although both the TOE and TIE online teaching and learning resources are discussed, TIE is only discussed as a software component because almost all the commonly used online teaching and learning resources are sourced from this software component. Even though the hardware components such as computers, digital cameras and the like, are important in teaching and learning, this study goes beyond the hardware and concentrates on the software component of TIE and TOE (ideological‐ware). However, this paper does not concentrate on definitions of the issues around the e‐learning resources but rather, it concentrates on what these resources do and produce in teaching and learning.

231

Simon Bheki Khoza

2. Literature review 2.1 The four commonly used e‐learning resources (tools) Online synchronous discussion (Online chat) is an online resource or tool used to conduct a real time discussion from different locations, the same location or from both of these conditions. According to Holmes and Gardner (2006), online chat promotes effective interaction and collaboration between students as well as between students and their facilitators. A study conducted by Bowler (2009) concludes that students enjoy the use of online chat in learning because their queries are answered quickly and those who are shy to contribute in the face‐to‐face discussion, can contribute and participate in the online chat. However, as much as they enjoy the online chat they do not want it to replace the face‐to‐face discussion, which has more social elements than the online chat. The same study also reveals that the online chat is not effective if one has large groups. This suggests that online chat should only support face‐to‐face activities instead of trying to replace them. As a result, Lytras, Gasevic, De Pablos and Huang (2008), believe that online chat has to enhance face‐ to‐face discussions. Therefore, online chat may not be used alone to achieve deep learning but may be strong in introducing a topic for the day, marking register, and in communicating social issues. Online asynchronous discussion (Discussion forum) is an online resource or tool used to conduct threaded discussion (not real time) either from different locations or the same location. A study, conducted by Macdonald (2006:47), concludes that online discussion “‘presents opportunities to develop independent self‐ directed learners”. Facilitators need to build students’ confidence because “learning online requires students to study more independently than they may previously have been used to” (Macdonald, 2006:115). This suggests that facilitators have a long way to go in preparing students for online discussion. This method may also include using emails so that students become familiar with online discussion environments because emails function in a similar way as the online discussion. Therefore, discussion forums, like the chat, may not work alone to promote deep learning but may be strong in exchanging documents and online presentation. Facebook is one of the Web 2.0 resources which was extended to anyone who wanted to use it in September 2006, after it “was created in February 2004” for Ivy League University students by Mark Zuckerberg at Harvard University” (Ivala and Gachago, 2012:153). Facebook is a platform, used by internet users, to create a simple and friendly webpage. When they design these webpages it is not necessary for them to understand any internet programming language like HTML because they do not have to make use of any language. A study, by Ivala and Gachago (2012:164), concludes by indicating that “Facebook enhanced by cell phones, should be utilised in higher education to promote student interaction and greater engagement with learning materials”. This suggests that Facebook is important in teaching and learning if it promotes interaction and student engagement which is becoming the backbone of any student‐centred learning environment. This becomes possible when considering the fact that most students today have cell phones through which they can access the internet. Therefore, Facebook can enhance students’ means of communication and their identities. According to Lam (2012:378) “past research on online social network sites evidence that there are a number of benefits including the improved student participation …” However, like the chat and discussion forum, it alone may not promote deep learning but it may be strong in communicating social issues with friends. Online Web Logs are called Blogs. Web Logging is called blogging and a person who uses the Blogs is called a blogger. The Blogs are also one of the Web 2.0 resources, used by the internet users, to create webpages without any understanding of internet programming language. In most cases they work as an online reflective journal when blog users present activities that reflect on their experiences. The study, by Ivala and Gachago (2012:163), recommends that “lecturers should embed the use of Facebook and Blogs in their teaching into the larger curricular framework and not see the use of technology as another tool to fit into an already full curriculum”. This suggests that these online resources (TIE) should combine well with TOE in order to promote learning because learning is not only about TIE but it is about both TIE (hardware & software) and TOE (ideological‐ware). Therefore, it is clear that these online resources have a potential of attracting students in order to encourage them to participate in a discussion or communication process. This suggests that facilitators have an opportunity to take advantage of this potential by turning this platform into an environment and making use of these resources as taxonomies of learning by bringing in a strong element of TOE. The following are some

232

Simon Bheki Khoza of the studies that have tried to pave a way forward on what these resources are doing or producing in learning environments.

2.2 Studies that seem to promote TIE The following studies suggest that TIE is important in teaching and learning although it promotes Coincidental Learning: According to Tanner and Jones (2000), online resources motivate even normally passive students to contribute if there is a discussion. Pilkington (2004) observed passive students increasing their performance and participation. Holmes and Gardner (2006), concluded that online resources improve interaction and collaboration. Ivala and Gachago (2012), concluded that they are important because students get quicker answers; there is enhanced engagement and improved students’ motivation. However, Ivala and Gachago (2012) do bring in an element of TOE when they talk about embedding these resources as a part of any course design so that they are not separated from the process. Therefore, these studies suggest that learning can take place without TOE because TIE is powerful enough to improve interaction, engagement and also to bring about learning. This does, however mean that there could be more social issues than education. If studies praise the use of TIE and ignore TOE, they may end up distracting any important element that can be developed from the potential of these resources.

2.3 Studies that seem to promote TOE The following studies indirectly indicate the importance of TOE: According to Bowler (2009), online resources have to be used for signposting in order to open learning opportunities and save time for students and facilitators. In considering TOE, Bowler (2009) indicates that it is important to invest in staff training and the time taken when developing a course. Van Koller (2003) and Makoe (2012), see staff training as training that produces facilitators’ competencies, which are defined as personal resources that promote facilitators’ actual performance in their jobs (experiences, knowledge and skills) (TOE). Khoza’s (2011) study identifies a problem with university lecturers who do not use these resources because they do not have time to learn to use TIE. Kuh (2009) adds that what can be used to predict students’ learning is the time and energy they spend on educational activities. Blewett, Quilling, Bulbulia and Wamuyu (2011), identify a need for facilitators to train their students in the use of TIE early before their course starts because if they are challenged by TIE it becomes difficult for them to apply TOE in learning. They further indicate that time is a problem for the facilitators to train their students in using TIE because they have to finish their syllabus within a specific timeframe where there is no time budgeted for this training in the course. Khoza’s (2011) study also identifies a problem with university lecturers where they do not have time because they have heavy workloads and are afraid of these E‐ learning resources, as they are not ready for the new resources. Among other things they claim that there is nothing wrong with their teaching without these resources because they have previously been teaching successfully without them. As a result they become digital immigrants, while their students become digital natives, in using these resources for social or entertainment activities (Khoza 2012). This suggests that if students want to learn their courses using these resources, they should spend more time and energy on their course activities (TOE) but for social development they should spend time and energy on the online resources (TIE). Therefore, these studies suggest the promotion of TOE (facilitator’s competencies in dealing with course curriculum design) in using TIE. Facilitators’ competencies are very important in using these resources to avoid students in terms of learning from TIE instead of learning with TIE driven by TOE. This means more education will take place rather than social issues. This debate brings in the following two concepts (Convenient and Awareness) in trying to bring about solutions.

3. Two theories deduced from the literature review 3.1 Convenient/coincidental learning If these online resources are used without TOE, they promote what can be termed as Coincidental Learning, which is in the space between Entertainment and Education (Khoza 2012). Coincidental learning always happens if Technology of Education (TOE) is overpowered by Technology in Education (TIE). It takes place in the absence of awareness where learning cannot be guaranteed to take place and it takes place by coincidence

233

Simon Bheki Khoza while students are entertaining themselves with social issues that are not related to their course or module. In highlighting this situation, Amory (2010) indicates that learning is not about technology (TIE) but rather that it is about the ideology (TOE) behind the use of these technologies. Students seem to enjoy the use of TIE; and as a result they develop social knowledge and skills using the TIE. According to Watts and Lioyd (2000), this type of learning is good at helping students by increasing gains in TIE capabilities and presentation skills. If students try to use these resources for their courses without them being integrated as a part of their curriculum, it takes them a long time to learn and this makes it difficult for them to learn and complete their courses as the courses have timeframes for the completion of learning to take place. They may even develop superficial course knowledge or skills after they have been assessed and failed the module or course, which may not help them. Therefore, a solution to this may be the application of Awareness Learning as discussed in the next section.

3.2 Awareness learning

Figure 1: Awareness learning layers This paper therefore recommends the application of what can be termed Awareness Learning (Figure 1) which takes place only when there is an appropriate balance between both TIE (Learning resources) and TOE (All the layers of Figure 1) in the teaching and learning environments. Awareness Learning is important in combining facilitators’ competencies, online resources and all curriculum issues (TIE & TOE) around the course. Awareness Learning means that students are consciously aware of the module or course curriculum (MICRO – teaching & course plan or the 36% facilitator’s main duties in Figure 1) and their own curriculum (NANO – students’ personal plans for learning the module / course or the student’s 64% which consists of 8 layers in Figure 1) (Van den Akker, Bannan, Kelly, Nieveen and Plomp, 2010) in their learning process. Students have to understand the vision and intentions as specified in the documents as they should be linked to the content (Van den Akker et al., 2010). Awareness Learning is a very important ingredient of any successful teaching or learning process which involves TIE. In the teaching and learning process, Awareness Learning has eight important layers. Students should consciously engage or deal with all the eight layers all the time until the course is over (Figure 1). It means that facilitators, firstly, start by designing course curriculum at the MICRO level to accommodate the student’s curriculum (NANO) using the pragmatic approach, which focuses on the practical usability of the

234

Simon Bheki Khoza curriculum product according to the wishes and capabilities of the students (Visscher‐Voerman and Gustafson 2004). “Curriculum development takes place in close interaction with local practice and [students]. Formative evaluation is a core activity. Design and evaluation...” (Van den Akker, de Boer, Folmer, Kuiper, Letschert, Nieveen and Thijs 2009:18) When both facilitators and students are involved in the design of a module curriculum and agree in the positioning of TIE and TOE, they become consciously aware of their teaching and learning process. They may both value the process of teaching and learning because TIE (Learning resources as one of the 8 layers of TOE in Figure 1) is embedded within TOE to produce their final course curriculum. Blewett et al (2011), emphasize the flexibility in terms of course design to accommodate any new innovation or potential that accompanies these online resources. “Careful thought has therefore been given to how technologists, educators and learners can best shape the fast‐changing Internet in the near future. It aims to explore how education can change the web, as well as how the web can change education” (Neil, 2007:4). This means that the MICRO and NANO curriculum should be open for the new learning opportunities that are presented by any development of TIE, which automatically calls for TOE to combine according to the nature of students and context. Facilitators and students become aware of when to play / socialize or teach / learn / assess if they are all consciously aware of their curriculum. The most challenging part is when they get used to the process and start to use habit in teaching and learning with no, or limited awareness. As a result, none of the teaching or learning activities may be completed with one hundred percent commitment if habit is taking its course. Secondly, facilitators should have a process of evaluating learning outcomes against the different levels of taxonomies in education before they teach their modules because relevant key words are taken from the taxonomies. The key words are used to ensure that the learning outcomes are observable and measurable (Adam 2004). They are also generated from the content (what students are learning) to address all levels of the three learning domains of Bloom’s taxonomies, especially the higher order levels (Adam 2006). These should be explained to the students so that students become aware of their level of performance as expected in the course; even though other students may go beyond these outcomes, but specifying them together with relevant TIE will help to work as a main signposting framework. Harden (2002:153), further suggests that learning outcomes should cover a range of competences that challenge students to apply what they are learning in their professions. These competences should be applicable in three categories of learning. Category one is what is expected of a student in his or her profession in terms of technical competences (TIE or “doing the right thing”). Category two is how their courses are being approached in their profession (TOE or “doing the thing right”). Category three involves students’ on‐going development in their professions (Facilitator’s duties or professional competences – “the right person doing it”). This means that learning outcomes should drive any course design in order to give students the right direction in learning. Thirdly, facilitators ensure that they distinguish aims and objectives from learning outcomes in driving modules (Khoza 2001). Aims are general statements, which are generated according to the facilitators’ intentions; while objectives are specific statements; that are also generated according to the facilitators’ intentions (Donnelly and Fitzmaurice 2005). On the other hand, learning outcomes are addressed in terms of students’ performance when they perform according to the relevant learning outcomes’ keywords. These issues should be explained to the students in advance so that students can work hard to achieve the outcomes, while the facilitators are working hard to achieve the aims and objectives. Fourthly, facilitators have to design, select and apply only appropriate learning activities that facilitate achievement of all the module‐intended learning outcomes (SLO 2008). These learning activities have to accommodate only relevant teaching and learning resources. Khoza (2012) adds that they should also accommodate student’s curriculum in order to achieve learning outcomes. Fifthly, facilitators address a question of why students are learning their modules by bringing in or inviting relevant community members (including specialists in the field) that may contribute towards the success of their modules (Van den Akker et al., 2010). They then choose the relevant approach or approaches to position their facilitation duties and clearly define their facilitation duties to their students. If they use aims or objectives to drive their lessons it means they are using the teacher‐centred approach (behaviourist), if they

235

Simon Bheki Khoza use content to drive their lessons it means they are applying the content‐centred approach (for cognitivist) and if they use learning outcomes to drive their lessons it means they are applying the student‐centred approach (for constructivist) (Anderson and Elloumi 2004). Other facilitators apply the three approaches as taxonomies of learning because they all have strengths and weaknesses. The application of these three approaches helps students because they are effective enough to accommodate all the students’ styles of learning. Therefore, students’ duties should be linked to that of their facilitators. Sixthly, facilitators address questions of where learning is taking place and when learning is taking place so that they can assess students after learning has taken place (Van den Akker et al., 2010). It is important for the facilitators to assess students after learning has taken place. This only happens when both facilitators and students are consciously aware of the aims, objectives and learning outcomes as well as relevant TIE. The more challenging part of learning is when facilitators ignore the learning outcomes in their teaching processes. Ignoring learning outcomes, by using aims and objectives to drive learning, indicates that learning is mostly about facilitators’ satisfaction, opposed to the students, because aims and objectives are about facilitators’ intentions (Donnelly and Fitzmaurice 2005). This means that they take a position where it does not matter what is happening or how and why is it happening, but their interpretation of what is happening in their teaching process is important to drive their module (Mezirow 1990). When facilitators’ interpretation of what they are doing is positive, it does not matter how much other specialists in the field may criticise it; they will continue, until they are forced by a certain force to transform, in order to change their position. Students find it difficult to learn in this situation because students start by learning what will be assessed in order to achieve the learning outcomes. Seventhly, awareness of alignment between issues of intended curriculum and implemented curriculum are very important in producing a positively expected, attained curriculum (Van den Akker et al., 2010). In the absence of alignment between intended learning outcomes, teaching or learning methods, teaching or learning activities, teaching / learning resources and assessment strategies; students face challenges in the process (Biggs 2003). As a result, students have to cover or learn every possible chunk of information because what they are learning is different from what is intended in terms of outcomes. It is a common practice that when students are not given a clear direction of their curriculum they consult different sources in order to cover a broad scope of their curriculum (Mezirow 1990). As a result, they find their way by transforming themselves to accommodate the situation by learning what they think will be assessed, not the entire curriculum (Ramsden 2003). For those who fail to transform, it is common that they drop out of their modules or fail the modules. Lastly, in assessing students for attained learning curriculum, formative and summative assessments are important. Formative assessment is a part of learning when students are assessed for their collection of relevant information. This indicates to facilitators where their support is required without necessarily grading students (it usually takes place during the learning processes). When students use these e‐learning resources, they seem to enjoy them and they easily form as a habit once they get used to them. It then becomes easy to make mistakes and the grading can lead to the failure of students. It is then important for the facilitator to always introduce new e‐learning activities that force the students to be aware of what they are doing at all times and avoid habit in learning. Summative assessment is a summary of formative assessment of their students’ achievements of learning outcomes where facilitators are grading their students (it usually takes place at the end of learning processes). Kennedy, Hyland and Ryan (2006), indicate that it is a common practice that if these assessment strategies are used for continuous assessment, the process becomes a collection of different sets of summative assessment used in generating marks for grading students without any formative assessment element that helps the students with feedback. Ramsden (2003), indicates that assessment takes place at the end of the teaching and learning processes for facilitators, while it takes place at the beginning of the teaching and learning processes for students. This means that students are being tested by anything (including new e‐learning resources) that is given to them while their facilitators are sometimes not aware of this situation. Sometimes it results in this situation when facilitators over practise their role of being social agents that promote culture and other social processes

236

Simon Bheki Khoza (Francis and Le Roux 2011). Facilitators should be aware of each and every element of their facilitation so that their actions do not affect their students’ performance (awareness).

4. Concluding with a beginning Therefore, this paper is not concluding but it is starting a debate by challenging e‐learning facilitators, students and other specialists to generate solutions on how best can they combine TIE, TOE with their professional competences in order to improve teaching and learning processes (in e‐learning). It also encourages them to think about the replacement of Convenient Learning with Awareness Learning in e‐learning.

References Adam, S. (2004). Using Learning Outcomes: A consideration of the nature, role, application and implications for European education of employing learning outcomes at the local, national and international levels. Report on United Kingdom Bologna Seminar, July 2004, Herriot‐Watt University. Adam, S. (2006). An introduction to learning outcomes, in EUA Bologna Handbook, Froment E., Kohler J, Purser L, Wilson L (Eds), article B.2.3‐1, Raabe, Berlin. Amory, A (2010). Education technology and hidden ideological contradictions. Educational Technology & Society, Vol 13, No. 1, pp 69‐79. Anderson, T. and Elloumi, F. (2004). Theory and Practice of Online. Canada: Athabasca University. Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Open University Press, Buckingham. Blewett, C.; Quilling, R.; Bulbulia, Z. and Wamuyu, P.K. (2011). Students challenges in a Virtual Collaborative Learning Course Spanning Multiple countries. Alternation, Vol 18, No. 2, pp 216 – 244. Bowler, M. (2009). Learning to ‘Chat’ in a virtual learning environment: Using online synchronous discussion to conduct a first year undergraduate tutorial. The paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, University of Manchester, 2‐5 September 2009. Donnelly, R. and Fitzmaurice, M. (2005). Designing Modules for Learning. In: Emerging Issues in the Practice of University Learning and Teaching, O’Neill, G et al. AISHE, Dublin. Francis, D. and Le Roux, A. (2011). Teaching for social justice education: the intersection between identity, critical agency, and social justice education. South African Journal of Education, Vol 31, No. 1, pp 299‐311. Harden, R. M. (2002). Learning outcomes and instructional objectives: is there a difference? Medical Teacher, Vol 24, No. 2, pp 151 – 155. Holmes, B. and Gardner, J. (2006). E‐learning: Concepts and Practice, Sage, London. Ivala, E. and Gachago, D. (2012). Social media for enhancing student engagement: The use of Facebook and blogs at a University of technology. South African Journal of Higher Education, Vol 26, No. 1, pp 152‐167. Kennedy, D.; Hyland, A. and Ryan, N. (2006). Writing and Using Learning Outcomes: a Practical Guide. European Higher Education Area (EHEA), Bologna. Khoza, S.B. (2001). The Outcomes of students studying a computer literacy course at Unischool. MED dissertation. University of Durban‐Westville, Durban. Khoza, S.B. (2011). Who promotes web‐based teaching and learning in high education? Progressio, Vol 33, No. 1, pp 155‐ 170. Khoza, S.B. (2012). Who helps an online facilitator to learn with students in a day? Mevlana International Journal of Education, Vol 2, No. 2, pp 75‐84. Kuh, G. (2009). The National Survey of Student Engagement: Conceptual and Empirical Foundations. New Directions for Institutional Research, Vol 141, No. 1, pp 5‐20. Lam, L. (2012). An Innovative Research on the usage of Facebook in the Higher Education context of Hong Kong. Electronic Journal of E‐learning, Vol 10, No. 4, pp 378 – 386. Lytras, M.D; Gasevic, D; De Pablos, P.O. and Huang, W. (2008). Technology Enhanced Learning: Best Practices, PA, IGI Publishing, Hershey. Macdonald, J. (2006) Blended Learning and Online Tutoring: a good practice guide, Gower, Aldershot. Makoe, M. (2012). Teaching digital natives: Identifying competencies for the mobile learning facilitators in distance education. South African Journal of Higher Education, Vol 26, No. 1, pp 91‐104. Mezirow, J. (1990). Fostering Critical Reflection in Adulthood: A Guide to Transformative and Emancipatory Learning. Jossey‐Bass Publishers, San Francisco. Moyer‐Guse, E. (2008). Communication Theory: Towards a theory of Entertainment persuasion, Explain the Persuasive effects of Entertainment‐Education messages. The Ohio State University, Columbus. International Communication Association, Vol 18, No. 1, pp 407‐425. Neil, S. (2007). Education 2.0? Designing the web for teaching and learning: A Commentary by the Technology Enhanced Learning phase of the Teaching and Learning Research Programme. EPSRC, London Knowledge Lab, University of London Percival, F. and Ellington, H. (1988). A handbook of educational technology (2nd Ed.), Kogen Page, London. Pilkington, R. (2004). Developing discussion for learning. Journal of Computer Assisted, Vol 20, No. 1, pp 161 – 164. Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. London: Routledge.

237

Simon Bheki Khoza SLO (2008). Survey on the use of educational materials 2008/2009. SLO, Enschede. Tanner, H. and Jones, S. (2000). Using ICT to support Interactive teaching and learning on a secondary mathematics PGCE course, WWW British Educational Research Association annual conference, Cardiff University, 7‐10 September 2000. Van den Akker, J.; de Boer, W.; Folmer, E.; Kuiper, W.; Letschert, J.; Nieveen, N and Thijs, A. (2009). Curriculum in Development. Enschede: Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development Van den Akker, J.; Bannan, B.; Kelly, A.E; Nieveen, N and Plomp T (2010). An introduction to Educational Design Research. Enschede: Axis Media Ontwerpers also available on www.slo.nl Van Koller, J.F. (2003). Professional development of distance education professional (DEPs) at TSA: A profile of functions. South African Journal of Education, Vol 23, No. 1, pp 23‐28. Visscher‐Voerman, I. and Gustafson, K.L. (2004). Paradigms in the theory and practice of education and training design. Educational Technology, Research and Development, Vol 52, No. 1, pp 69‐89. Watts, M. and Lioyd, C. (2000). A classroom evaluation of Espresso for Schools, Faculty of Education, University of Surrey, Roehampton.

238

Mobile Learning: A Kaleidoscope Marlena Kruger and Riana Bester CTI Education Group, GHO, Johannesburg, South Africa marlenak@cti.co.za rianab@cti.co.za Abstract: CTI is an accredited private higher education institution (university) with the Higher Education Council (HEC) in South Africa. Its head office is in Fourways, Johannesburg. CTI has 12 campuses nationwide and offers higher certificates and degrees in business and information technology. The BCom and BSc degrees were rolled out to all 12 campuses from January 2013. All first year students received 10“ Samsung tablets with their textbooks and course materials in digital format. We’ve worked closely with all role‐players to ensure that all pillars for successful implementation of the e‐book tablet project are in place. Timeous completion and conversion of course materials and e‐textbooks for the start of the academic year in 2013 took extra time and focus of a dedicated project manager and multi‐disciplinary team members. Several aspects were focused on during the conceptual, preparation and planning phases in 2012 (phase 1). This phase included aspects such as the student pilot project to establish the most suitable tablet to procure for students and lecturers, upgrading of infrastructure on campuses, student and lecturer training and supported materials, guidelines and rules for user standards. Phase 2 started in January 2013 with the implementation of a design research project which includes several planned interventions to ensure continuous development and support of lecturers and students with the focus on enhancing the academic experience of students. This phase will implement qualitative and quantitative methodologies which will include sharing of experiences using different digital media, tools and instruments to gather data from lecturers, students and other role‐players. Data will be analysed and compared with different theoretical frameworks for using integrating innovative technologies in learning environments, such as Rogers (1995), Russell (1996) and Gladhart (2001). Changes in teaching and learning practices will be discussed by way of using the technology integration matrix and other measurements to determine the development and movement of teaching and learning practices towards emerging pedagogies for the information age. More detail of research methodologies, actions and interventions as well as data gathering methods during project will be focused and shared. Keywords: mobile learning, e‐textbooks, tablet computers, faculty development, students’ enhancement of academic experience

1. Background: Discussion of research problem and motivation for study Previously, CTI students received printed textbooks that were included in the fees. From 2013, new degree and higher certificate students are receiving Samsung Galaxy tablets with e‐books instead of printed text books. This per se is not a problem however literature regarding the use of tablet computers in education is limited to publications that report on using it as e book readers and very little evidence exists of research that investigated a project of this extent specifically in higher education in South Africa. More research is definitely needed.

1.1 Research problem Challenges faced by lecturers and students that will start using tablets at CTI might include the following: 1.1.1 Lecturer perspective

Tablet computers, similar to other technologies, has the potential to become a distraction in class if it is not applied for structured, meaningful learning activities

Additional to this, a high percentage of CTI’s lecturers have never used a tablet computer for teaching, learning and assessment and some lecturers have never used a tablet computer at all.

1.1.2 Student perspective Many of our students come from communities where

not only infrastructure like wireless networks often does not exist

but basic resources like electricity is also not a given

technology has not been implemented in all schools and many students did not have exposure to the use of technology for teaching, learning and assessment

239

Marlena Kruger and Riana Bester All of these problems lead to a possible research question: “What are the principles (critical issues) for the optimum utilisation of tablets and e‐books to improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment in a private higher education institution in South Africa?”

1.2 Aims and objectives of the study The aim of this study is to identify principles for the optimum utilisation of tablets and e‐books to improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment in a private higher education institution in South Africa. In order to answer the research question, this aim could be divided into the following objectives, from three perspectives: 1.2.1 Lecturer perspective

To provide iterative cycles of collaborative learning opportunities for lecturers in order to guide them through stages of acquisition, participation and contribution and eventually transformative (improved) practice (Stetsenko, 2008).

To determine how lecturers integrate technology in the classroom regarding

Approaches/strategies that they apply

Methods that they employ

Specific technologies/applications that they use

To subsequently identify principles of best practice of using tablets for teaching, learning and assessment, in other words to identify models of best practice, and record ‘lessons learnt’

1.2.2 Student perspective

To investigate the impact of the use of tablets and e‐books on teaching, learning and assessment

To investigate the impact of the use of tablets on “changing the digital difference” and equipping students with additional skills

To conduct a practical, usability study from the students’ perspective

1.2.3 Institutional (CTI) perspective

To describe and adjust the infrastructure on campuses according to the needs of all users

This paper will concentrate on the first perspective, namely that of the lecturers.

2. Literature review and theoretical framework Marc Prensky (2001) started a generational debate about the use of ICTs in education, early in the new millennium. He implied a generational division in this regard when he named young people who use digital technology with confidence because they grew up with it, “digital natives” and older, “more mature” users of technology, “digital immigrants”. Prensky alleged that the digital native generation have different expectations of life in general, and also more specifically of learning. Although this information is helpful it regrettably led to sweeping statements about digital natives such as “...they are forcing a change in the model of pedagogy...” (Tapscott, 2009). This is presently the cause of needlessly high levels of distress amongst many educators who often fear that learners might not respect them because of their lesser experience with technology. Some educators feel bewildered about the influence that technology might have on learning (Palfrey & Gasser quoted in Jones) and some even seem to be in a state of “moral panic” (Bennet, Maton, & Kervin, 2008) However, there is no clear‐cut proof that young students intentionally form generational cohorts or express generation based demands pertaining to the use of technology for their studies (Jones & Binhui, 2011). Students who commence higher education, do not all possess the same level of technology proficiency (Nakamaru, 2011) and therefore do not belong to a single, homogeneous digital generation (Jones & Binhui, 2011). Furthermore, can the diversity of technology users not solely be ascribed to a difference in age; demographic factors play an equally important role (Jones & Binhui,

240

Marlena Kruger and Riana Bester 2011). This is especially relevant in the South‐African context. Although a “digital difference” might exist between educators and learners it is fortunately not rigid and impossible to overcome (Jones & Binhui, 2011). Almost a decade after he introduced the “digital native and immigrant” idea, Prensky introduced a new concept, namely that of “digital wisdom” (Prensky, 2009). He now proposed that everyone can become a “digitally enhanced individual” with digital wisdom obtainable through sufficient engagement with technology. This should reassure the older generation of educators but it also obliges them to attain digital wisdom for the sake of their learners, since technology has become an essential part of human development (Jones & Binhui, 2011). Related to Prensky’s ideas is Stoerger’s (2009) metaphor, the “Digital Melting Pot”. It describes the variety of technological aptitude and the co‐existence of today’s technology users effectively. This also emphasises the opportunities for participation during which less competent technology users can become transformed through their own interaction with technology, as well as by the contributions of peers and other more experienced individuals (Stetsenko, 2008). Educators should be brave and humble enough to be lifelong learners and accept to learn not only with their learners but also from them! Educators should therefore make the most of technology as a meditational tool for teaching and learning and not simply dismiss it as a distraction. This will nonetheless only be possible if the integration of technology in the curriculum is well informed in order to promote meaningful learning. A more detailed and structured description for this melting pot of technology mediated doings is provided by Engeström’s notion of an activity system (Engeström, 2009). This idea of Engeström was derived from Vygotsky’s “Mediation triangle” and both these concepts are anchored in the Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT), which is the theoretical framework of this study. According to Vygotsky, human action is object orientated and artefact (tool) mediated. His notion of mediation is illustrated in Figure 2.

Figure 1: Vygotsky's mediation triangle

Figure 2: Engeström’s activity system

In spite of its simple structure, this diagram not only indicates the relationship between three central elements of human action: subject, instrument, and object (Engeström, Miettinen, & Punamäki, 1999), but also exemplifies the importance of tools in the mediation process as well as the fact that human action is always purposeful and directed at achieving a specific goal. Lautenbach (2005) described activity as human doings that work towards a common goal by employing internal or external tools, in order to reach a desired outcome. He (Lautenbach, 2011b) also stated that educational technologies can provide and support interventions by extending the human mediating presence. However, Vygotsky’s triangle does not explain this role that other humans play during activity. For this reason Engeström extended Vygotsky triangle to include another three elements; the community, its associated rules as well as the division of labour that is a result of diversity, model of an activity system (see Figure 3). Although this system is more complex, it is more applicable when focusing on the integration and use of technologies in the learning environment.

3. Research design and methodology A mixed method (qualitative as well as quantitative) research approach will be followed to gather data for the lecturer perspective i.e. to identify principles for the optimum implementation of tablet computers and e‐ books by lecturers, to improve their learning facilitation. A Design‐based Research (DBR) design will be most appropriate for the CTI educational context. This research design is seen as a “socially responsible” design for educational research (Reeves, Herrington, & Oliver, 2005) and we believe it to be in line with the vision of ICEL

241

Marlena Kruger and Riana Bester to bring together, as well as gain understanding of academic research and proven best practices. Another reason for our choice of methodology is that an activity system is normally used as unit of analysis during Design‐based research (Engeström, 2009). The origin and concept of an extended activity system as part of CHAT was already explained during the literature review (Lautenbach, 2011).

3.1 Proposed research design: Design‐based research Various alternative terms are often used for this qualitative research design; “design experiment”, “design research” and “development research”. The purpose of this research approach is to develop solutions to educational challenges in naturalistic learning situations and entails the implementation of practical interventions. These interventions should never randomly be put into practice, but should always be anchored in theory, carefully planned and adhering to the following criteria:

Theory‐driven; testing theoretical suppositions, which guide the design of interventions

Interventionist; includes not only designed learning settings but also the systematic investigation of expected relationship between aspects of the intervention on learning

Process‐focused; trying to comprehend both the learning process and the influence of the designed interventions on that learning.

Utility oriented; aiming to produce practical knowledge for educational improvement

Collaborative; knowledge is constructed through participation and contribution of both the researcher and the participants

Iterative; consisting of repeated cycles of planning, acting, observing and reflecting. Each cycle will consist of four distinctive, yet overlapping phases of planning, acting, observing and reflecting. Cycles will follow and build on each other as illustrated in Figure 4 that follows.

Figure 3: Successive learning interventions Our study will be based on this model. Each intervention cycle will be planned by the researcher as a collaborative learning opportunity, providing suggestions of applications, methods and strategies to use on the tablet. Activities will be planned to include those that are active, collaborative, creative, integrative as well as evaluative, concentrating on developing a new pedagogy that is appropriate for the information age and not just adapt existing traditional pedagogies for the sake of using technology. (See Table 1). Using this strategy to assist lecturers should encourage them to start transforming their learning facilitation (teaching) as well .During the “acting” phase lecturers will be requested to participate in the learning activities to acquire new

242

Marlena Kruger and Riana Bester knowledge and skills. Support will be available at all times. During the “observing” phase participants will be encouraged to contribute by providing suggestions of their own. The “reflection” phase will guide the planning of subsequent interventions. During this phase the researcher will identify preliminary principles for the optimal utilisation of tablets for teaching, learning and assessment. These principles will be the result of combined efforts by the researcher and the participants and can be included or adapted for subsequent phases. Table 1: Classroom practice using emerging pedagogy for information age Aspect Active

Collaboration

Creative Integrative

Evaluative

Less of “Traditional Pedagogy” Activities prescribed by teachers Whole‐class instruction Little variation activities Pace determined by program Individual Homogeneous groups Everyone for her/himself Reproductive learning Apply known solutions to problems No link between theory and practice Separate subjects Discipline based Individual teaching Teacher or lecturer directed Summative

More of “Emerging Pedagogy for information age” Activities determined through negotiation Small groups Varied activities Pace determined by students Working in teams Heterogeneous groups Supporting each other Productive learning Find new solutions for problems Integrating theory and practice Relations between subjects Theme based Teams of teachers or lecturers Student directed Formative

3.2 Actions and timeframes While keeping in mind that the interventions during Design‐based Research should be flexible, we plan the following: The following learning opportunities/interventions will be designed and implemented for this first year of our research study. 3.2.1 Intervention 1 This first learning intervention namely the lecturer training workshops already took place during November and December 2012 when face to face tablet and e‐book training workshops were planned, presented (“acted out”) and observed on all 12 CTI campuses. Feedback has been requested in the form of a survey and will be discussed in the following section as “Preliminary findings. 3.2.2 Intervention 2 An extended (February – May 2013) electronic learning intervention using an online space to build a community of practice across time and distance that separate the 12 campuses has already started At the beginning of this intervention the lecturers will be requested to complete an electronic copy of a questionnaire in order to plot themselves on the “Technology Integration Matrix” presented in Table 2. 3.2.3 Intervention 3 A face to face “Research development and Training seminar” is planned on each campus to provide an opportunity for lecturers to report back on their experiences and to identify and award incentives to “champions”. This will take place during the first two weeks of June 2013. The lecturers will be requested to complete the questionnaire used during intervention 2 again in order to monitor their progress. Training of “newcomers” that will start participating in the second semester is also planned for the same day and the participants of the first semester will be encouraged to become involved. 3.2.4 Intervention 4 One central “Research Indaba” at the end of June 2013 will provide an opportunity for the selected lecturers (champions) from all campuses to report on, and share their progress and lessons learnt during the first six months of 2013.

243

Marlena Kruger and Riana Bester 3.2.5 Intervention 5 A second extended (July – October 2013) electronic learning intervention using an online space to build a community of practice across time and distance that separate the 12 campuses. During this intervention the lecturers will be requested to complete a survey in order to plot themselves on the “Technology Integration Matrix” presented in Table 2 below. We foresee that the ‘more experienced’ lecturers that already participated during the first semester will be able to assist the newcomers. True to the nature of Design‐based Research, some of the design principles that have been identified should be implemented and refined and new strategies should be tested. Table 2: Technology integration matrix Characteristics of Learning environment ↓

a. Active: Students are actively engaged in using technology as a tool rather than passively receiving information from the technology.

b. Collaborative: Students use technology tools to collaborate with others rather than working individually at all times.

c. Constructive: Students use technology tools to build understanding rather than simply receive information.

Level of Technology Integration into the Curriculum Æ

Students mainly use technology for drill and practice and computer based training.

Students are beginning to utilize prescribed technology tools to create products, according to specific criteria, for example use a word processor to create a report.

Students primarily work alone when using technology.

Opportunities are provided for students to utilize prescribed collaborative tools, such as email, in conventional ways.

Technology is only used to deliver information to students.

Students are encouraged to utilize prescribed constructive tools such as graphic organizers to build upon prior knowledge and construct meaning.

244

3 4 Students are provided with opportunities to Students are modify or empowered personalise the and encouraged throughout the use of day to select prescribed technology tools appropriate to accomplish technology purposes, for tools and example use actively apply colour or add them to the graphics to MS tasks at hand. office documents Opportunities are created for Students are students allowed to throughout the select and day and across modify subject areas, technology tools to utilize to facilitate technology collaborative tools to work. facilitate collaborative learning. Students are Opportunities allowed and are created and opportunities students are are created for allowed to them to utilize select and technology to modify make technology tools connections to assist them in and construct the construction understanding of across understanding. disciplines and throughout the day.

5 Students are provided with ongoing access to online resources, and encouraged to actively select and pursue topics beyond the limitations of the resource centre Opportunities are created for students to use technology that enable them to collaborate with peers and experts irrespective of time zone or physical distances. Students are allowed and opportunities are created for them to utilize technology to construct, share, and publish knowledge to a worldwide audience.

Marlena Kruger and Riana Bester Table 3: Technology integration matrix (continued)

Level of Technology Integration into the Curriculum Æ

Characteristics of Learning environment ↓

Students are d. Authentic: only expected to Students use technology tools use technology to complete to solve real‐ assigned world problems activities that meaningful to are generally them rather than unrelated to working on real‐world artificial assignments. problems.

e. Goal Directed: Students use technology tools to set goals, plan activities, monitor progress, and evaluate results rather than simply completing assignments without reflection.

Students are provided with directions, guidance, and feedback from technology, rather than using technology tools to set goals, plan activities, monitor progress, or self‐ evaluate.

Students are provided with opportunities to apply technology tools to some content‐specific activities that are based on real‐world problems.

Students are provided with opportunities to select and modify technology tools to solve problems based on real‐world issues that are not necessarily content specific.

Students are allowed to select appropriate technology tools to complete authentic tasks across disciplines.

From time to time, students are provided with opportunities to use technology to either plan, monitor, or evaluate an activity.

Students are provided with opportunities to select and modify the use of technology tools to facilitate goal‐setting, planning, monitoring, and evaluating specific activities.

Students are provided with opportunities to use technology tools to set goals, plan activities, monitor progress, and evaluate results throughout the curriculum.

5 By means of technology tools, students are encouraged to participate in outside‐of‐ school projects and problem‐ solving activities that have meaning for the students and the community. Students are guided to engage in ongoing meta‐ cognitive activities at a level that would be unattainable without the support of technology tools.

3.2.6 Intervention 6 This second face to face “Research development and Training seminar” for the year should be similar but not identical to the first, is planned for November 2013. Again it will be combined with training for newcomers if necessary or possible

3.3 Sampling of participants Although participation in the research project will be voluntary, efforts will be made to involve as many lecturers and other role players as possible, on all 12 CTI campuses.

3.4 Data collection methods and instruments Design‐based Research requires a mixed method approach; qualitative as well as supporting quantitative data will be needed. Therefore a variety of instruments will be utilised. 3.4.1 Questionnaires Two different questionnaires are used, to obtain three different data sets, as discussed in the previous section:

To obtain biographical data of students and lecturers.

To obtain qualitative data of lecturers’ first experience (feelings/attitudes) with tablets as well as the training workshops

245

Marlena Kruger and Riana Bester

To determine the progress and level of integration of technology according to the “Technology Integration Matrix”

3.4.2 Focus groups and interviews These can be documented with video and audio recordings and subsequently analysed(coded). 3.4.3 Document analysis Online resources like e mails, participation on the electronic platform and all other documents will be analysed. 3.4.4 Evaluation forms Evaluation forms of lecturers’ presentations at the Research and Development seminars that will be hosted on all twelve campuses. These forms will be completed by peers (other lecturers), principals and academic coordinators.

4. Preliminary findings of intervention 1 These findings were obtained from the first questionnaire. This sample of participants consisted of lectures that responded by completing the questionnaire and represents 32% of the total of the lecturers that attended the training. The first section of questions aimed to collect biographical information regarding the lecturers and include age, gender and subject area. The age distribution of the sample of the participating lecturers is shown below in Figure 5.

Figure 4: Age of sample of participating lecturers 14 of this sample were female and 23 male 12 of the sample of participants are IT lecturers, 24 are Business lecturers and 1 person teaches in both fields of study. The second section of questions was aimed at collecting data regarding the use of technology by the lecturers. Only 4 of the 37 participants indicated that they have never used computers for teaching purposes before. 15 lecturers have used tablets before and 22 have not. 10 of the 15 lecturers who used tablets previously, used Samsung tablets. The third and last section of the questionnaire included open ended questions, to determine the attitudes of the lecturers towards the use of tablet computers before and after the training workshops. The results are depicted below in Figure 5

246

Marlena Kruger and Riana Bester

Figure 5: Attitude changes of lecturers before and after training workshops ‐ Percentage

5. Conclusion Although the project is still at an early stage with regards to gathering data and attaining a better understanding of the impact and changes on the pedagogy of teaching and learning, it seems that we are finding ourselves in very stimulating and challenging times with the integration of technologies into teaching and learning environments. We’ll also need to focus on developing detailed guiding principles and best practices within specific contexts.

References Bennet, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The digital natives debates: a critical review of evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology , 39 (5), 775‐786. Engeström, Y. (2009). From Design Experiments to Formative Interventions. Helsinki: University of Helsinki. Jones, C., & Binhui, S. (2011). The net generation and digital natives: implications for higher education. Higher Education Academy: York. Lautenbach, G. V. (2011, October 12). Expansive learning cycles: Lecturers using educational technologies for teaching and learning. Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa. Lautenbach, G. V. (2011). Student‐generated design principles for transforming an educational technology module. University of Johannesburg, Department of Mathematics, Science, Technology & Computer Education. Johannesburg: University of Johannesburg. Madyarov, I. (2008). Contradictions in a distance content‐based English as a foreign language course: Activity theoretical perspective. USF Graduate School. Graduate School Theses and Dissertations. Nakamaru, S. (2011). Making (and not making) connections with Web 2.0 technologies. National Council of Teachers of English. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon , 9 (5), 1 ‐ 15. Prensky, M. (2009, feb/March). H. Sapiens Digital: From Digital Immigrants and Digital Natives to Digital Wisdom. The Journal of Online Education’s . Reeves, T. C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2005). Design Research: A socially Responsible Approach to Instructional Technology Research in Higher Education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 16 (2), 96‐111. Stetsenko, A. (2008). From relational ontology to transformative activist stance on development and learning: Expanding Vygotsky's (CHAT) project. Cult Stud of Sci Educ , 471‐491. Stoerger, S. (2009). The digital melting pot: Bridging the digital native‐immigrant divide. First Monday, 14 (7). Tapscott, D. (2009). Grown Up Digital: How the Net Generation Is Changing Your World. McGraw‐Hill.

247

Using Facebook to Teach Communication and Academic Literacy Skills: Perceptions of University Students in Botswana Joel Magogwe and Beauty Ntereke University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana magogwej@mopipi.ub.bw Beauty.ntereke@mopipi.ub.bw Abstract: Social media such as Facebook and twitter are now widely used by students to communicate with friends across the world. These social networking technologies have now infiltrated into education. However, there are different perceptions regarding whether Facebook should be used for teaching and learning purposes. To further explore this issue, this study investigated perceptions of students (n=209) learning communication and academic literacy skills at the University of Botswana. Data was collected using a paper questionnaire adapted from (Roblyer, 2010), and interviews conducted on six of these students. Findings show that 87.1 % (n=182) of these students used Facebook. 96.2 % of these (n=200) used Facebook daily. They mainly used Facebook for socialisation and other purposes such as networking, seeking information, entertainment, communication, and shopping. However, 63.2 % (n=406) of the 642 responses show that students agreed that Facebook should be used in education to teach communication and academic literacy Skills. These findings support previous recommendations that Facebook should be used in education because it facilitates communication, and it is accessible and cheaper to use. Keywords: Facebook, technology, communication, academic literacy skills, online learning, social networking

1. Introduction Current global innovations taking place affect our lives in many ways. Technology in particular continues to develop tools such as cellular phones, websites, ipods and cameras. These affect the way we live and learn. In response, institutions such as The University of Botswana have a mission to ensure that its undergraduates match the on‐going technological advancements by being talented, creative and confident. The University of Botswana aims to produce independent, self‐directed, team‐oriented, innovative but socially responsible, nationally and internationally marketable and competitive graduates (University of Botswana Learning and teaching policy, 2008). Its mission is also to extend access to higher education by utilising information and communication technologies, within the framework of life‐long and open learning. To that end, the University of Botswana offers compulsory and elective communication and academic literacy skills courses to first year and post year one students to provide key competencies for academic and professional life. In view of the above, this study aims to investigate perceptions of University of Botswana students’ on the use of Facebook. The University of Botswana is the oldest and largest institution of Higher learning in Botswana located in Southern Africa between Zimbabwe, Zambia, Namibia and South Africa.

2. Literature review It has been argued that theory is important in educational practice and research because it helps us see the bigger picture and to view our practice and research from a broader perspective, and to make connections with the work of others (see Wilson, 1997). On the other hand, some critics feel that theory filters our perceptions and blinds very important lessons of reality from us (McCormick and McCormick, 1992). Notwithstanding the importance of theory in practice and research, this study explores perceptions on use of Facebook in teaching and learning of communication and academic literacy skills. Facebook is a digital technology or social networking site like Twitter, MySpace, Badoo and Google used by individuals socially and in learning. Beetham, McGill, and Littlejohn (2009) indicate that digital technologies could have a significant potential to support learning in educational domains, and that their effective use will require students to move beyond using them for social purposes and gain understanding on how they can be used to support learning. Some studies conclude that students can acquire a range of literacies when they use digital tools for social purposes (Willet and Sefton‐Green, 2003). Under certain circumstances, these literacies appear to be transferred to support learning in educational contexts (Conole, de Laat, Dillon, and Darby, 2006; Creanor, Trinder, Gowan, and Howells, 2006). However, other studies conclude that learners find it difficult to transfer literacies across boundaries (Carmichael, Miller, and Smith, 2007).

248

Joel Magogwe and Beauty Ntereke Facebook originated from the United States of America in 2004 where it was initially used for social networking but later for education. Mark Zuckerberg, a student at Harvard University in the United States started Facebook, the fastest, cheaper and most convenient way of communicating with a large group of people. It can be accessed through cell phones anywhere anytime. Generally, It is used for sending messages, cataloguing pictures, installing quizzes, discussing in groups and many more. Facebook has become the most popular social networking site for both young and not so young people. According to Siegle (2011), one out of every 12 people on earth use Facebook. As at December 2012 Facebook had over one billion active users (http:newsroom.fb.com). Facebook is popular in education too. Research in USA shows that a vast majority of students at public universities have Facebook accounts Hoover (2008). According to Roblyer et al. (2010), Facebook is a valuable tool in educational communications and collaborations. It is now used for student interactions (West et al., 2009; Kabilan et al., 2010); knowledge transfer (Madge et al., 2009); communication, social, and cognitive and critical thinking development (Christofides et al., 2009; Ross et al., 2009); to increase individual responsibility and autonomy, and to build self‐esteem (Bosch, 2009; Orr et al., 2009); and to communicate with the teacher outside the classes (Selwyn, 2009). Facebook also provides immediate responses from the students. Duboff (2007) found in a study at Yale University that faculty members felt that Facebook made students part of the same academic community and it helped break down barriers between themselves and students. Matthews (2006) similarly found that Facebook helped them to reach over 75 % of his target audience. However, some students and lecturers are not comfortable with using Facebook for educational purposes. Connell (2009) found that some 12 % students felt that Facebook had a potential to infringe on their sense of personal privacy. Also highlighted are risks involved when people express inappropriate behaviour, abuse and bully others on social network sites (Butler, 2010; Catanzaro, 2011). Some lecturers too are still apprehensive about the use of Facebook in education. Roblyer et al. (2010) compared perceptions of 62 higher education staff with 120 students of a mid‐sized university on their use of Facebook. They found that students were more likely to use Facebook and similar technology than staff. According to Kleiner, Thomas, Lewis, and Greene (2007), lecturers are generally reluctant to use technology innovations. In a recent study on educational technology use in teacher education programmes, Kleiner, Thomas, Lewis, and Greene (2007) report that the National Centre for Education Statistics concluded that the reluctance of 73 % of faculty members remains a major barrier to effective integration of technologies in teacher preparation.

3. Justification We chose to explore the use of Facebook to teach communication and academic literacy skills at the University of Botswana looking at its potential use in education. We also wanted to investigate the possibility of using Facebook in the communication and academic literacy classroom. This study does not attempt to generalise its findings but to inform future studies and discussions on the use of Facebook, especially in the communication and academic literacy classroom. According to Bosch (2009) there is little research on the possible uses of Facebook with existing literature focusing more on its social uses; and that most of the research that exists is based in the US. Therefore, this research will increase the number of studies on Facebook, especially in Africa. In our knowledge, nobody has explored the use of Facebook to teach communication and academic literacy skills in Botswana. Despite that, it is essential to carry out this research to respond to the University of Botswana’s emphasis on producing students with developed communication skills, organisational and team work skills, interpersonal skills and social responsibility (University of Botswana Teaching and Learning Policy, 2008). This study asks the following questions:

Do the University of Botswana students use Facebook?

How often do they use Facebook?

For what purpose do they use Facebook?

Do they think Facebook should be used to teach communication and academic literacy skills?

4. Methodology 4.1 Sample A sample of 209 students was used in this study. 50.2 % (n=105) of the students came from the Social Science Faculty; and 49.8 % (n=104) came from Humanities. 91.9 % (n=192) were first years, 5.7 % (n=12) second years,

249

Joel Magogwe and Beauty Ntereke 1.9 % (n=4), and only 0.5 % (n=1) was a fourth year. The students above first year were probably retaking the Communication and Academic Literacy Course. 65.8 % (n=127) were female and 34.2 % (n=32) were male. 85 % (n=175) were aged between 16 and 20 years, while 8.3 % (n=17) were aged between 21 and 25 years, and 6.8 % (n=14) were more than 26 years old. Convenience sampling technique was used to select the students because of their proximity to the researchers who teach them communication and academic literacy Skills. The main focus of this study is to explore perceptions of these students but not to generalise the findings across all first years.

4.2 Survey A paper‐based questionnaire, adapted from (Roblyer, 2010), was used for the students comprising 11 closed‐ ended and open‐ended questions to solicit perceptions on use of Facebook. Very minor changes were made to the questionnaire because the authors thought it was relevant for Botswana and easy to understand. For example, questions 10 and 11 were asked in the context of the communication and academic literacy (COM 151 and COM152) courses offered at the University of Botswana. The first four questions solicited demographic information such as level of education, gender, age and faculty. Other questions asked students to tick either ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on whether they had used Facebook before and/or whether they are still using it; how often they used it; for what purpose they used; and whether Facebook should be used in class. Open‐ ended questions were asked mainly for the students to provide reasons for the choices they made to some of the questions, such as why they thought Facebook should or should not be used in class.

4.3 Procedure The students’ questionnaire took roughly 20 minutes to complete. The questionnaires were administered in class by the researchers or lecturers of these classes. They were immediately collected after completion. Students’ anonymity was guaranteed, as this study was not interested in divulging identities. They were asked to feel free to ask questions where they did not understand.

4.4 Interviews Semi‐structured oral interviews were conducted on 6 undergraduate students. The interviewees were all first year students aged between 16 and 20. The interviews allowed for full capture of non‐verbal aspects of communication, feelings and attitudes. Through this method, a number of issues that had not been captured in the questionnaires emerged (Creswell, 2007) hence providing additional data and triangulation of evidence. The interviewees were asked whether they used Facebook and /or other social media and how often they did. They were also asked why they used Facebook and whether it should be used to teach communication and academic literacy Skills. Also, they were asked to suggest specifically how Facebook can be used to teach these skills.

4.5 Analysis Questionnaire data was analysed by counting frequency of responses to the questions. The study did not establish relationships between variables but explored perceptions and reasons for those perceptions. Open‐ ended questions and interview data were analysed for emerging themes and patterns by both authors to satisfy inter‐rater reliability. Where necessary, students were followed up so that they could clarify their submissions.

5. Results and discussion The first research question of this study sought to find out if University of Botswana communication and academic literacy students used Facebook. The results show that out of the 207 responses, 87.1 % (n=182) show that students used Facebook; and only 4.3 (n=9) % used Twitter; 2.9 % (n=6) used Facebook, Twitter and Skype; and 4.8 % (n=10) did not use social media at all. Only one out of the six interviewees indicated that they did not use social media. Four of them said they used Facebook; two both Facebook and Twitter; one Twitter only; and only one did not use Facebook. All of them, except one, used Facebook daily. The second research question sought to find out about the frequency of use of Facebook, and 96.2 % (n=200) of the students indicated that they used Facebook every day for at least one hour.

250

Joel Magogwe and Beauty Ntereke The above findings suggest that majority of the students spend ample time using Facebook, thus corroborating international trends of using Facebook by students (Grosseck et. al, 2011). It could be argued that Facebook has become part of the students’ daily life. It seems that the students willingly use Facebook, and if adopted into the Communication and Academic Literacy classroom, lecturers would possibly spend less energy and time compelling students to do work requiring interaction and communication. Anecdotally, lectures teaching the communication and literacy skills at the University of Botswana courses feel that students have developed a culture of silence that should be broken. Huang et al., 2010) sees Facebook as an online knowledge‐sharing network forged by interpersonal interactions and communication skills. The third question sought to find out for what purpose the students used Facebook. Out of the 453 responses to this question, 39.7 % (n=180) indicated that the students used Facebook to keep in touch with friends; 25.4 % (n=115) to connect with other people; 21 % (n=95) to communicate with other students on school work; and only 3.1 % (n=14) did not use Facebook at all. The findings of a follow up open‐ended question show that the students used Facebook mainly for socialising with friends and family, interacting with people from different cultures, networking for business and religious purposes, sport and entertainment, shopping and finally for research and school work (See Table 1). Table 1: Purpose of using Facebook Purpose of use To know what is happening in other people’s lives; to stalk boyfriend and tease other people; receive messages from friends and family; Learning more about different cultures and people To unwind or for entertainment; Usually when I am bored I log onto read jokes and see; to see where parties are in Gaborone To spread the gospel and also for religious purposes, keep in touch with pastors around the world; to network with business people; I get updates from different organizations. I am a member of Eduvolunteers. To ask for help on life issues; to get information on sports, job opportunities and different events; Keep up with current affairs. To show people how extraordinary my mind works; to voice my thoughts For reading and posting motivational quotes in some groups I have created; Group discussions. To do my shopping for clothes and shoes.

N 18

% 37.5

12.5

18.8

14.6

2 2

4.2 4.2

2.1

Looking for information especially situations in life which need hope and comfort; For research on school work. For saving money that I use for airtime Total

4.2

1 48

2.1

The interview findings show that the students used Facebook because it was cheaper and easy to access it: Student A said, “although I don’t use Facebook, I think it can be used to reach many people. It is also cheaper and everyone has access to it. Given the opportunity I can learn how to use it”. The above findings suggest that it is socio‐economically worthwhile to use Facebook because, as already indicated, it is inexpensive and expedites communication. These findings support previous research that Facebook is predominantly used for social interaction and to connect with friends and family members (Skues and Williams, 2011) The fourth question sought to find out if students thought Facebook should be used to teach communication and academic literacy skills. The results show that out of the 642 responses to this question 63.2 % (n‐406) agreed and 36.8 % (n=236) disagreed. 67.7 % (n=275) think Facebook could be used for classwork and to connect with other students. On the other hand, only 32.4 % (n=131) did not mind or think Facebook should be used for educational purposes for, among other reasons, it could invade their privacy (See Table 2). As one interviewee indicated, “Yes, however, the disadvantage of using Facebook is that you can write what is on your mind and therefore expose yourself, and thus the danger of privacy”. Another question asked students to specify areas where Facebook could be used in the Communication and Academic Literacy classroom. Out of the 442 responses, the students thought Facebook should be used for group discussions (38.9%, n=172); posting handouts and/or notes (24.66%, n=109); assignments (21.7%, n=96); and research projects (14.71%, n=65). One of the interviewees indicated that Facebook could be used “for connecting with old friends; sometimes for school group work, for example at DSW we use Facebook; to post assignments and for asking questions about assignments”. Another one said “it may be useful to have a group and ask one another

251

Joel Magogwe and Beauty Ntereke questions from home. Maybe for homework or to edit our work or tell us you were not gonna be able to come for class or you tell us you are not coming”. The above findings generally show that the students were in favour of using Facebook in the communication and academic literacy classroom. The responses in a follow‐up open‐ended question show that the students suggested that Facebook could be used for learning and revision purposes and for communicating announcements and assessment information. Students also felt that Facebook could increase communication with their lecturers and it could help them to share feelings and problems with others. As one student put it, I think in my own point of view it has prevented me to commit suicide in the sense that whenever I do not have someone to share or talk to about my problem I post on Facebook and people help me and I feel much better after I have posted about my feelings. Facebook could break the culture of silence which, according to Akindele and Trennepohl (2007), is the hallmark of students in the Botswana classroom. In our opinion and the opinion of the students, Facebook could take the classroom to everywhere the students are. As one student indicated, if one is hospitalized or is sick then he or she might be able to get information being taught in class through Facebook. Facebook can also develop the students’ networking and team building skills. The world today in its different forms needs people with interpersonal and intercultural cosmopolitan outlook. Table 2: Use of Facebook in the classroom Statement

Yes

It would be useful to use Facebook for class work or educational purposes. I would welcome the opportunity to connect with students on Facebook. Facebook should be used for social purposes and not for education. Using Facebook for educational purposes would invade my privacy. I don’t care whether Facebook is used in education or not; it does not matter to me. Total

139 136 42 32 57

34.2 33.5 10.4 7.9 14.1

26 18 73 72 47

6.4 4.4 18.0 17.7 11.6

406

236

6. Implications Facebook has been shown to be vital for communication, and thus it may contribute significantly to improving communication skills of the University of Botswana students. In particular, it may break the silence of the communication and academic literacy students and create a more interactive relationship between the students and the lecturers. It may remove the wall between the lectures, and remove the stigma of lecturers being perceived as superior, inhumane, and inaccessible sources of knowledge as far as the thinking seems to be in this part of the world. Lecturers, particularly those teaching communication and academic literacy skills should get out of their comfort zones and explore the possibility of using technologies, such as Facebook, in their classrooms. Research shows that Facebook can positively affect classroom practices and student involvement (Aydin, 2012) Facebook could also be used to support learning and teaching of General Education Courses (GEC) offered by the Communication and Study Skills Unit of the University of Botswana. GEC 213 (Advanced Communication Skills Course) offered to post year one students offers human and organisational communication skills such as the communication process, interpersonal and intercultural communication. Facebook has been found to positively relate to culture. For example, Birky and Collins (2011) found that social networks narrow the gap between cultures. On the other hand, GEC 212 (Advanced Oral Presentation Skills Course) trains practical oral and public speaking skills. So, Facebook could provide a platform for students to freely share their feelings and ideas on how to improve their oral communication skills. Students generally find it challenging to present in front of the audience for various reasons such lack of confidence. According to Aydin (2012), Facebook has been found to provide great benefits for users experiencing low self‐esteem. So, lecturers teaching the above courses could use Facebook to improve the students’ intercultural communication and to boost their confidence because most students enjoy using Facebook.

7. Limitations The findings of this study cannot be generalised to the entire university, but to a large extent they shed light into what the students think about the use of Facebook in education.

252

Joel Magogwe and Beauty Ntereke

8. Conclusion The findings of this study shed light into the students’ use of Facebook and how they perceive it as a possible tool for communication in education. Like students in other parts of the world, University of Botswana students in this study used Facebook frequently for socialising with friends and family members. For instance, more than 80 % of them indicated that they used Facebook every day for at least one hour. Arguably, Facebook is part of these students’ life. It is therefore incumbent upon lecturers and stakeholders to devise means of helping students to utilise Facebook in a more educational and productive way to take advantage of the ample amount of time they spend using this tool. Facebook is a possible avenue that can be used to easily reach the students geographically. To start with, more than 60 % of the students in this study agreed that Facebook should be used to teach communication and academic literacy skills. Facebook is also a comparatively cheap means of communicating with the students as testified by one of the interviewees. Lecturers could therefore use it to quickly reach as many students as possible with one dial wherever they are whenever they wish. It does not confine the lecturer and student meetings to the school premises. As mentioned earlier, one student indicated that Facebook can take academic information matters to a student’s hospital bed. Mack, Behler, Roberts and Rimland (2007:4) indicate that Facebook is “… an excellent mechanism for communicating with our students because it allows us to go where they already are; it is an environment that students are already comfortable with”. Facebook is also available to narrow or even fill the cultural gap between the students themselves and their lecturers. University of Botswana students come from different cultural, socio‐economic and political backgrounds. In addition, the structure and policy of the University of Botswana determine employment of foreign lecturers to complement local expertise. As a result, foreign lecturers bring with them cultures and practices foreign to most students. Therefore, Facebook becomes a convenient cultural mediator between the students and lecturers. First, it creates a common culturally uniform technological platform for both students and lecturers. Second, it reduces the cultural differences inherent in face‐to‐face verbal and non‐verbal communication. Communication and academic skills lecturers use group work substantially to encourage team work, interaction, communication and responsibility among students. Sometimes group work becomes daunting to some students because they are far apart and their schedules clash. Facebook therefore becomes handy because it allows them to meet in cyberspace where they do not need to travel physically. It also allows introverted students to share their views and to gradually build their self‐efficacy and confidence. Ellison et al. (2007) indicate Facebook may improve the psychological wellbeing of the students and can help the students with low esteem to develop into more confident people. Finally, Facebook is now a necessity in public and private organisations for networking and official communication. Besides, it is convenient for personal interaction and communication in entertainment, shopping and other purposes. In short, Facebook is indispensable for networking and communication in the st 21 century. Therefore, students should be encouraged to extend its use beyond socialisation to network and find economic opportunities in the global village. Rather than discourage them or block its content from them, lecturers should guide them to use it wisely and responsibly. Lastly, using Facebook to teach communication and academic literacy skills is in line with the University of Botswana’s mission to produce technologically versatile students.

References Akindele, D. & Trennepohl, B. (2008) Breaking the Culture of silence: teaching writing and Oral Presentation skills to Botswana University Students: Language, Culture and Curriculum, 21:2, 154‐166 Aydin, S. (2012) “A Review Of Research On Facebook As An Educational Environment”, Education Tech Research Development, Vol 60, pp 1093‐1106. Beetham, H., M., McGill, L. and Littlejohn, A. (2009) “Thriving In The 21st Century: Final Report Of Learning Literacies For The Digital Age (LLiDA) Project”, Retrieved June 10, 2007, from http:www.academy.gcal.ac.uk/llida/ Birky, I. and Collins, W. (2011) “Facebook: Maintaining Ethical Practice In The Cyberspace Age”, Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, Vol 25, No. 3, pp 193‐203. Bosch, T.E. (2009) “Using Online Social Networking For Teaching And Learning; Facebook Use At The University Of Cape Town”, Communication: South African Journal for Communication Theory And Research, Vol 35 No. 2, pp 185‐200. Bugeja, M.J. (2006) “Facing The Facebook”, Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(21), 1‐4.

253

Joel Magogwe and Beauty Ntereke Butler, K. (2010) “Tweeting Your Own Horn”, District Administration,Vol 46, No.2, pp 41‐44. Carmichael, E., Miller, K. and Smith, K. (2007) “Researching literacy For Learning In The Vocational Curriculum”, In Osborne, M. Houston, M. and Toman, N. (Eds), The Pedagogy of Lifelong Learning: Understanding Effective Teaching and Learning in Diverse Contexts. London: Rutledge. Catanzaro, M.F. (2011) “Indirect Aggression, Bullying And Female Teen Victimization: A literature Review”, Pastoral Care In Education, Vol 29, No. 2, pp 83‐101. Christodes, E., Muise, A., and Desmarais, S. (2009) “Information Disclosure And control On Facebook: Are they two sides of the same coin or two different processes?”, CyberPsychology and Behaviour, Vol 12, No. 3, pp 341–345. Connell, S. (2009) “Academic libraries, Facebook And MySpace, And Student Outreach: Conole, G., de Laat, M., Dillon, T. and Darby, J. (2006) “Student Experiences Of Technologies, JISC LXP Final report. Retrieved August, 03, 2007, from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded‐documents/LEX%OFinal %Oreport%20dec%2006.pd# Creanor, L., Trinder, K., Gowan, D., and Howells, C. (2006) “LEX – The Learner Experience of E‐learning. JISC report [online]”, Retrieved November 15, 2007 from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded‐documents/LEX%20Final%20Report‐ August06.pdf Duboff, J. (2007) “The Latest Crime‐Busting Tool: Facebook.com”, Newsweek, Retrieved Aug. 3, 2007, from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12209620/site/ newsweek/print/1/ displaymode/1098/. Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook "friends:" Social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 12(4), article 1. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue4/ellison.html Groseeck, G., Bran, R. and Tiru, L. (2011) “Dear Teacher, What Should I Write On My Wall? A Case Study On Academic Uses Of Facebook”, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol 15, pp 1425‐1430. Hoover, E. (2008) Colleges “Face Tough Sell To Freshmen, Survey Find”, Chronicle of Higher Education,Vol 54, No. 21, p 1. Html. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/portal_libraries_and_the_academy/v009/9.1.connell. Http:newsroom.fb.com. Retrieved February 1, 2013. Huang, J.J.S., Young, S.J. H., Huang, Y.M., and Hsiao, I.Y.T. (2010) “Social Learning Networks: Build Mobile Learning Networks Based On Collaborative Services”, Educational Technology and Society, Vol 13, No. 3, pp 78‐92. Kabilan, M.K., Ahmad, N. and Abidin, M.J.Z. (2010) Facebook: An Online Environment For Learning Of English In Institutions Of Higher Education? Internet and Higher Education, 13, 179‐187. Kleiner, B., Thomas, N. and Lewis, L. (2007) Educational technology in teacher education programs for initial licensure (NCES 2008–040). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Kosik, A. (2007). The Implications Of Facebook. Sharing The Commonwealth: Critical Issues In Higher Education 9–10. http://www.pcpa.net/March2006.pdf (accessed 27 September 2007). Mack, D., Behler, A., Roberts, B., & Rimland, E. (2007). Reaching students with Facebook: Data and best practices. Electronic Journal of Academic and Special Librarianship, 8(2). Retrieved February 4, 2013 from http://southernlibrarianship.icaap.org/content/v08n02/mack_d01.html Madge, C., Meek, J., Wellens, J. and Hooley, T. (2009) “Facebook, Social Iintegration And Informal Learning At University: ‘It is more for socialising and talking to friends about work than for actually doing work’. Learning”, Media and Technology, Vol 34 No. 2, pp 141–155. McCormick, N. and McCormick, J. (1992) “Computer Friends And Foes: Content Of Undergraduates’ Electronic Mail”, Computers in Human Behaviour, Vol 8, No. 4, pp 379‐405. Orr, E. S., Sisic, M., Ross, C., Simmering, M. G., Arseneault, J. M. and Orr, R. R. (2009) “The Infuence Of Shyness On The Use Of Facebook In An Undergraduate Sample”, CyberPsychology and Behavior, Vol 12, No. 3, pp 337–340. Roblyer, M.D., McDaniel,M., Webb, M., Herman, J. and James Vince Witty, J. (2010) “Findings On Facebook In Higher Education: A comparison Of College Faculty And Student Uses And Perceptions Of Social Networking Sites”, Internet and Higher Education 13,134–140 Ross, C., Orr, E. S., Sisic, M., Arseneault, J. M., Simmering, M. G., and Orr, R. R. (2009) “Personality And Motivations Associated With Facebook Use”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol 25, No. 2, pp 578–586. Selwyn, N. (2009) “Faceworking: Exploring Students’ Education‐related Use Of Facebook”, Learning, Media And Technology, Vol 34, No.2, pp 157–174. Siegle, D. (2011) “Facing Facebook: A Guide For Non‐teens”, Gifted Child Today, Vol 34, No. 2, pp 14‐19. Skues, L.W.J. and Williams, B. (2011) “Facebook in Higher Education Promotes Social But Not Academic Engagement.” In G. Williams, P. Statham, N, Brown and B. Cleland (Eds.). Changing Demands, Changing Directions. Proceedings Ascilite Hoburt 2011. (pp 1332 – 1342) University of Botswana, (2008) Learning and Teaching Policy. Academic Affairs department: Gaborone West, A., Lewis, J. and Currie, P. (2009) “Students’ Facebook ‘Friends’: Public and private spheres”, Journal of Youth Studies, Vol 12, No. 6, pp 615–627. Willet, R. and and Sefton‐Green, J. (2003) “ Living and Learning in Chatrooms (or does informal learning have anything to teach us?)” Retrieved 16 April 2006, from: http://wac.couk/sharedspaces/chartrooms.pdf Wilson, B. (1997) “Thoughts On Theory In Educational Technology”, Educational Technology, Vol 37 No. 1, pp 22‐27.

254

Investigating Factors That Influence the Socially Orientated Instructional Technology Adoption Rate in an Open Distance Learning Institution Peter Mkhize and Magda Huisman University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa North‐West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa mkhizpl@unisa.ac.za Abstract: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of two (relative advantage and compatibility) constructs, drawn diffusion of innovation theory, to the adoption rate of socially orientated instructional technologies, in an Open Distance Learning (ODL) institution. The study is based on a purposive sample of 241 students who are registered for a second‐year course at Unisa. A predictive analysis confirms that a socially orientated instruction strategy has a more predictive influence on the adoption rate of socially orientated instructional technology, than compatibility and relative advantage. Results indicate that the instructional designer should focus more on incorporating socially orientated pedagogic principles when designing a learning experience, in order to influence students’ usage of socially orientated instructional technology in an ODL environment. Keywords: socially orientated instructional technology, socially orientated instructional strategy, compatibility, relative advantage

1. Introduction In the advent of technology, business process automation enables improved performance, thereby increasing profits. Meanwhile, human capital is also becoming an integral, strategic component of thriving business operations. In line with the goal of instilling excellence in the workplace, institutions of higher learning aggressively embark on skills development campaigns, in order to support national skills inventory growth (Habiyaremye & Soete, 2009). Among other institutions that have geared themselves towards improving students’ learning experiences, and, thereby, yielding a better skills output, is the University of South Africa (Unisa). This university, the largest distance learning institution in South Africa, has re‐engineered its business processes in order to improve the quality of service delivered to its students. The result of this re‐engineering process is the introduction of the ODL model for tuition, research, and community engagement (Pityana, 2006). In this study, the researcher evaluates the influence of compatibility, relative advantage, and socially orientated instructional strategy on the adoption rate of socially orientated instructional technology, in light of the fact that social computing is gaining momentum in society (World Wide Worx, 2012). The subsequent section consists of a literature review, research methodology, a discussion of the results, and the conclusion.

2. Background to the study Unisa adopted the ODL model, which is used to model educational practices and the operational functions of the university (Moore et al, 2002). The decision to adopt the ODL model has a wide range of implications for different functional areas of the university. Among other functional areas of the university, are tuition and research – which are core functions of the institution (Pityana, 2009). The resultant change in the tuition model affects students and lecturers alike, who have to adapt their teaching, learning engagement and practices to suit ODL. Even though Unisa has a comprehensive ODL model, it is somehow challenging to orchestrate a chain of functions that should lead to a student benefit. Some of the ODL model advantages are student centeredness, collaborative learning openness, and lifelong learning (Pityana, 2009; Sambrook, 2003). The ODL model requires all the university’s functional areas to work collaboratively in providing seamless delivery of educational services. It is then important for all concerned to understand how their contributions are mapped towards the achievement of the strategic goals of the new ODL institution (Pityana, 2006). Among other contributors to the success of the university are students and lecturers, whose engagement forms the core delivery of the

255

Peter Mkhize and Magda Huisman university. Teaching and learning form a prominent component of the ODL model, in the sense that lecturers should ensure that instructional design is in line with ODL principles. The researchers, as an instructional designers, intend to investigate factors that contribute to improved adoption rate of socially orientated instructional technology. Socially orientated instructional technologies are based on already thriving social media.

3. Problem statement After the adoption of the ODL model, lecturers at Unisa had to adapt instructional material to new model – which had delivery and quality implications for the teaching and learning process (Abrahams, 2010). Unisa is the first university in South Africa – and Africa – to adopt the ODL model. As a result, academic and administrative staffs are wrestling with the transition to the ODL model, which is meant to thrive on technology induced platforms, in comparison to traditional distance education (Pityana, 2006). Moore et al. (2002) describe the ODL as a model that brings about the opportunity to extend learning in ways that would otherwise have been impossible for learners in distance locations. It allows accessibility through technology, and also a flexible learning experience (Akdemir & Koszalka, 2008; Sambrook, 2003; Wang et al, 2010). Meanwhile, the digital divide is still a reality in South Africa and sub‐Saharan countries –presenting challenges to the implementation of ODL initiatives (Mutula, 2005). On the other hand, South Africa, along with the rest of the world, has seen a craze in social networks and other socially orientated technologies. Contrary to digital divide concerns, the social networks craze presents an opportunity to use platforms that are widely available and accessible to students (Mutula, 2008; Mason & Rennie, 2008). A challenge with the idea of using a social platform as instructional delivery mechanism, is uncertainty about the adoption and appropriateness of social media as a learning delivery platform. In this article, the researcher will investigate the adoptability and magnitude of influence that other factors have on the adoptability of socially orientated instructional technology, by determining the association between socially orientated instructional technology with compatibility and relative advantage, in order to uncover what could be the best predictive factor for socially orientated technologies’ adoption rate.

4. Open distance learning model According to Jung (2005), ODL is underpinned by the principles of student centeredness, lifelong learning, openness and collaborative learning. These principles already imply types of instructional strategy (such as collaborative learning) that could be employed in sustaining ODL practices, and promote learning and teaching in the university (Fry, 2001; Smith & MacGregor, 2003). The principle of openness enables students who would otherwise not be able to get an opportunity to study at the university, to study for qualifications of their choice (Arabee & Mansur, 2006). Openness removes distance, time and/or money barriers to education (Prensky, 2004). However, the effectiveness of the openness is dependent on the appropriateness of the technology used by instructional designers to deliver learning material wherever they are situated. Instructional technology must be appropriate for students who might not have immediate access to certain delivery technology (Alonso et al, 2009; Izmirli & Kurt, 2009). On the other hand, a student centered learning environment goes a long way in providing a sense of ownership of the learning experience. In designing a student centered learning environment, lecturers should be sensitive to instructional strategy preferred by students, thereby applying instructional technology that will enhance a preferred instructional strategy (Drinkwater et al, 2004).

5. Instructional technology Instructional technology plays an integral role in the success of ODL institutions (University of South Africa, 2008). Instructional technology is any electronic media used to deliver instructional material in line with the learning objectives of a specific learning programme (Nielsen, 2009; Tennyson & Rasch, 1988). Electronic media is a prominent delivery method in Unisa’s ODL environment, which is aimed at improving distance coverage, and it provides flexible ways of presenting instructional material, depending on the instructional strategy applied in a specific course.

256

Peter Mkhize and Magda Huisman Instructional technology can be applied in a variety of ways. Gunasekaran et al,(2002) outline the four main benefits of using instructional technology in teaching and learning:

interactive self‐paced multimedia

assessment of knowledge and skills

performance support material such as references and job aids

online communication with instructors, experts and colleagues

These benefits are not limited to ODL institutions, and could also be used by those who are unable to attend traditional classes in real time – such as post‐graduate students in residential universities. These students need to interact with lecturers, or fellow students, asynchronously, without being obligated to be in a classroom at a scheduled time (Horton & Horton, 2003). This contributes to the flexibility of ODL, as students access instructional sessions through a synchronous or asynchronous delivery mechanism. Both these delivery mechanisms can be supported by commonly available instructional technologies such as smart phone, tablet‐ PC and other ICT‐supported learning tools (Leacock, 2005). Even so, it is important to acknowledge the impact of the digital divide in South African higher education, as the digital gap prevails mostly in rural communities (Mutula, 2008). In the same breath, the ODL environment is meant to be openly accessible to students from different social groups, including those from rural areas. Mkhize and Lubbe (2005) outline different types of ICT‐supported learning systems that can be used to facilitate learning for students from different social backgrounds, with different technology inclinations, and different socio‐cultural profiles. Their classification of ICT‐supported learning systems is based on their levels of technology intensity application to learning settings, as they gradually increase through maturity levels with levels of technology intensity (Mkhize, 2010).

6. Instructional strategy Unlike instructional technology, instructional strategy has received little attention in early online learning research, with more attention given to instructional technology and the power of technology to enable mass education (Burgess et al., 2010). In line with Lee (2001), e‐Learning and other online learning systems have emphasized technology integration at the expense of pedagogic and other educational principles, in designing online learning, whereas imparting knowledge and skills has been, and is, founded on educational principles. However, there is growing interest in instructional strategy, which addresses educational principles in the design of the online learning experience (Abrahams, 2010; Akdemir & Koszalka, 2008). Instructional strategies go beyond traditional pedagogic principles, since pedagogy focuses more on how children learn, in contrast to andragogy, situational learning and other learning strategies that enable facilitation of adult learning (Cross & Hamilton, 2002; Knowles, 1984). Instructional strategy integrates a variety of educational principles derived from a variety of learning theories (Akdemir & Koszalka, 2008). In Akdemir and Koszalka (2008), instructional strategy is unraveled as a way to impart knowledge and skills in the best educational manner, in order to take advantage of the instructional technology available to students at the time. Hence, ODL’s student centeredness, flexibility and openness are founded on instructional design that is efficient and effective in solving problems faced by students (Jung, 2005). It is important for instructional designers to monitor and apply an appropriate instructional strategy when designing instructional material for the ODL environment. Monitoring changing student profiles can help in ensuring that the instructional technology applied, is appropriate (Pityana, 2009). Some instructional strategies are based on specific learning theories, but they are not confined to conformance with basic assumptions of such theory (Kanuka & Garrison, 2004). Among other instructional strategies that are gaining interest and popularity, is the collaborative learning strategy – which could be attributed to the advent of social learning, social media and a growing culture of social interactivity in the social space (Cabral‐Cardoso & Cunha, 2003).

7. Diffusion of innovation Socially orientated instructional technology provides an innovative platform for facilitating learning both in the workplace and in academic institutions. With respect to the innovative element of socially orientated instructional technology in the university, it would be plausible to understand how students adopt innovation, or, perhaps, understand a predictive model (Wagner et al, 2011). Rogers (1995) introduces the diffusion of innovation model that could explain and predict adoption of innovation. Innovation refers to anything new

257

Peter Mkhize and Magda Huisman that can be used to explain and solve a current problem. Diffusion of innovation explains factors that influence the adoption rate of a creative process that yields better results in a specific situation. Therefore, e‐Learning is an innovation in the SA public sector, since it is relatively new in South African education. According to Rogers (1995), diffusion of innovation is underpinned by five constructs (in figure 1) that can help predict and understand issues relating to the innovation adoption rate:

relative advantage

compatibility

trialability

observability

complexity

Relative advantage refers to the extent to which employees believe that e‐Learning would be better than the traditional learning mechanisms. Employees would adopt innovation if they perceived it to add value to their lives, in terms of economic value and social prestige (Duan, et al, 2010).

Figure 1: Adoption rate for innovation Employees would be more likely to adopt innovation if it was perceived as being compatible with the traditional learning experiences and norms. It would be extremely difficult to introduce e‐Learning if it contradicted employees’ values attached to learning, in the traditional sense. Even though e‐Learning is marketed as innovation that will change the face of education and learning, it is important to ensure that the change doesn’t contradict the adopters’ values and acceptable norms (Adhikari, 2005). In addition, the complexity of the innovative system could be problematic, where employees would have to learn how to use e‐Learning systems, and then learn the skills delivered through e‐learning (Duan et al., 2010; Corrocher, 2010). e‐learning programmes should be designed in such a way that they are easy to use and understand; otherwise, they will be rejected. Some employees might be stuck in the process of learning how to use e‐Learning programmes, instead of acquiring skills needed to improve their performance in the workplace.

8. Research questions The following research questions will guide the selection and application of the inquiry method in this study:

What is the association between relative advantage and adoption of socially orientated instructional technology?

What is the association between socially orientated instructional strategy and the adoption rate of socially orientated instructional technology?

The above research questions are used as a guide to selection and application of the method of inquiry, in an attempt to reach the research objectives and thereby solve the research problem. .

258

Peter Mkhize and Magda Huisman

9. Research methodology and design In order to answer the research questions outlined above, the researcher will conduct a survey to gather student opinion, and establish the extent of usage of socially orientated instructional technology (Remenyi et al., 1998). The researcher will apply a quantitative strategy that would allow for deduction of meaning and possible solutions from literature.(Leedy & Ormrod, 2005). The unit of analysis for this research is students who are registered for an object‐oriented analysis module. The research instrument is a questionnaire containing items grouped into relevant dimensions. Questionnaire design started with an in‐depth literature review which enabled the researcher to draw key items that could be used to measure specific dimensions of the questionnaire.. A total of 32 items were drawn from literature and included in the questionnaire, in addition to biographic data. Items are presented as positive statements, with 5‐point Likert scales ranging from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always) (Gliem & Gliem, 2003). Questionnaires were distributed by e‐mail to all students registered for an object‐orientated analysis course,. Responses were collated, and then exported from pdf format to MS Excel, which was then exported to SPSS statistical analysis software. The researcher edited and coded the data, and then performed data description and all statistical analysis in SPSS.

10. Discussion of results Instructional technologies enable flexible facilitation of learning, if it is properly infused to effective instructional strategy during the design stage. This section explores the extent of use of different socially orientated instructional technologies. Table 1 shows that additional resources are the most used instructional technology, with the mean = 3.74. Meanwhile, e‐mail is the least used instructional, with the lowest mean = 1.94. The extent of use shown in Figure 2 confirms that intensity of use for additional resources is, as it stands, the highest in the ‘almost always’ bar, and the shortest in the ‘almost never’ bar. Table 1: Descriptive statistics for socially orientated instructional technology IT Discussion forum IT wikis IT_e‐mail IT additional resources Valid N (listwise)

N 81 81 79 78 75

Mean 3.00 2.52 1.94 3.74

Std. Deviation 1.183 1.266 1.030 1.178

The second most used instructional technology is discussion forums. It is moderately used, as it stands the tallest bar in the ‘sometimes’ cluster of bars. The rest of the socially orientated instructional technologies are showing weak presence, as their tallest bar is leaning toward ‘almost never’ used.

Figure 2: Extent of use for instructional technology On the other hand, instructional strategies are supposed to be supported by specific instructional technologies. Under current circumstances, discussion forums, wikis, additional resources and e‐mail are available for students to use in the ‘myUnisa’ platform. To ensure that learning takes place in this platform, instructional designers and facilitators should match instructional technology with the appropriate instructional strategy. Table 2 shows students’ most preferred instructional strategy. These instructional strategies are characterized by collaborative activities. The most preferred instructional strategy is relating new material to current knowledge, in order to deduce new meaning. In addition, students would like to make

259

Peter Mkhize and Magda Huisman their own discovery of knowledge, which is in line with creating new meaning where the students reflect on current knowledge in order to make new knowledge. Students also prefer to share ideas with fellow students in the learning programme, as indicated by mean = 3.08 in the descriptive statistics table. Table 2: Descriptive statistics instructional strategy IS exchanging of ideas IS relating current knowledge to new material IS own discovery of knowledge Valid N (listwise)

N 80 79 81 78

Minimum 1 2 2

Maximum 5 5 5

Mean 3.08 4.00 3.78

Std. Deviation 1.188 .862 .725

Figure 3 shows degrees of intensity where these instructional strategies are applied in students’ learning activities. There is a good show of those who prefer to share ideas with fellow students, and also prefer to learn by relating new experiences to existing knowledge, as well as learning by discovering new knowledge and ideas. These three instructional strategies are not mutually exclusive; they complement each other in the collaborative learning environment.

Figure 3: Extent of instructional strategy preference Instructional designers are faced with the task of striking a balance between instructional strategy and instructional technology that is accessible and supports preferred instructional strategy. Additionally the researcher measured magnitude of associations between the dependent variable (socially orientated instructional technology) and independent variables (socially orientated instructional strategy, compatibility, and relative advantage). Table 3 shows correlations between socially orientated instructional technology and independent variables,that could be associated with the adoption of socially orientated instructional technology in higher learning institutions. It also shows a moderate relationship between socially orientated instructional strategy and instructional technology, with R‐value = 0.485. This association is significant, with p‐ value = 0.00. Table 3: Correlation matrix showing relationship variables Correlations Socially Orientated Relative Instructional Socially Orientated advantage technology Strategy Relative advantage Pearson Correlation 1 Sig. (2‐tailed) N 77 Socially Orientated Pearson Correlation .308** 1 Instructional Technology Sig. (2‐tailed) .008 N 73 77 Socially Orientated Strategy Pearson Correlation .431** .485** 1 Sig. (2‐tailed) .000 .000 N 76 75 79 Compatibility Pearson Correlation .629** .262* .485** Sig. (2‐tailed) .000 .023 .000 N 77 75 78 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2‐tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2‐tailed).

260

Compatibility 1 79

Peter Mkhize and Magda Huisman On the other hand, relative advantage indicates a weak association with socially orientated instructional , with R‐value = 0.308, and significant p‐value = 0.008. Meanwhile, the association between socially orientated instructional technology and compatibility is also weak, with R‐value = 0.262 and p‐value = 0.023 – which is also significant. All measured associations are positive. However, these associations range from weak to moderate, which could be attributed to the fact that these technologies are discretionary. The use of socially orientated instructional technology is not mandatory, as a bigger part of facilitation takes place in print platforms that are traditional in distance learning. Table 4: Coefficients table showing degree of predictive ability of independent variables Coefficientsa

Model (Constant) Socially Orientated Strategy Compatibility Relative advantage

Unstandardised Coefficients B Std. Error 2.255 .320 .333 .433

2.747 .110 .111 .151

Standardise d Coefficients Beta

Sig.

.330 .335 .326

.821 2.906 2.996 2.860

.415 .005 .004 .006

a. Dependent Variable: Socially Orientated Instructional technology

In addition to finding an association between socially orientated instructional technology and independent variables, the researcher would also like to know which of the independent variables is the better predictor for the socially orientated instructional technology adoption rate. Figure 2 shows the results of regression analysis, which indicate that under the current circumstances compatibility is the better predictor of socially orientated instructional technology. Compatibility (0.335) yields the highest standardized coefficients in the Beta column, followed by socially orientated instructional strategy (0.330), and then relative advantage (0.326). All the predictive indicators have a significant p‐value < 0.05.

11. Findings and conclusion The findings of this study sensitized the researcher to the importance of considering the compatibility of the existing learning system, more than anything, when designing instructional material. Otherwise, innovative ways of delivering learning material would not be used effectively; even if they had some advantages such as a technologically improved learning platform. This does not mean that relative advantage would not contribute to the improved adoption rate of socially orientated instructional technologies, but instructional designers have to first consider the compatibility and appropriateness of the instructional strategy. The already thriving social media should make incorporation of socially orientated instructional technologies easier for instructional designers. According to World Wide Worx (2012), social media is showing fast pace growth in Southern Africa. However, instructional designers have to be careful not to confuse compatibility, in the sense that socially orientated instructional technologies are compatible with social applications, with application in the pedagogical platform. They should ensure that socially orientated instructional technologies are compatible with already existing instructional strategy. Table 4 indicates that socially orientated instructional strategy is a second‐best predictor of socially orientated instructional technology. Meanwhile, Table 3 shows a stronger correlation between compatibility and socially orientated instructional strategy. It is then important for instructional designers to ensure that socially orientated instructional technology is compatible with socially orientated instructional strategy. The objective of the paper was to evaluate the association between socially orientated instructional technology, socially orientated instructional strategy, compatibility, and relative advantage. This was done in order to determine whether compatibility and relative advantage could be positively or negatively associated with socially orientated instructional technology adoption in facilitating learning in a collaborative learning environment. The correlation technique was instrumental in measuring relationship between the dependent variable and the dependent variables. Therefore, innovative learning experiences would be adopted by

261

Peter Mkhize and Magda Huisman students, because socially orientated instructional technologies are compatible with current learning systems, so that they won’t have to make a strenuous effort to perform the same tasks they used to perform before the introduction of innovation platforms. Results also indicate that the socially orientated instructional technology adoption rate could be improved by communicating perceived relative advantage to students. They would like to see a change to an innovative learning system, coupled with added value to their learning experience. Relative advantage could be any kind of value that students attach to the learning experience. Therefore, instructional designers have to profile students in order to gain insight into what their concerns are, to understand advantages in the old learning system from the students’ perspective, and to then add more value, and ensure that students know and see the value as intended by the instructional designer.

References Abrahams., D. A. (2010), ‘Technology adoption in higher education: a framework for identifying and prioritizing issues and barriers to adoption of instructional technology’, Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, vol.2, no. 2, pp.34 – 49 Adhikari, A. (2005). Technology inclination of Indian consumers’ and organizations’ strategy: a research perspective. The ICFAI Journal of Service Marketing, 101(1), 26‐33 Akdemir, O., and Koszalka, T.A. (2007), ‘Investigating the relationships among instructional strategies and learning styles in online environment’, Computer and Education, vol. 50, pp. 1451‐1461. Alonso, F. Manrique, D. and Viňes, J.M. (2009). A moderate constructivist e‐learning instructional model evaluated on computer specialists. Computer and Education, (53) pp. 57 – 65. Arabee, Z. and Mansur, A. (2006), ‘MyGfL: A Lifelong Learning Platform for Malaysian Society’ The Electronic Journal of e‐ Learning, vol. 4, no.1, pp. 7 ‐ 14, available online at www.ejel.org Australian Flexible Learning Quick Guide Series. (2004), Assessment and online teaching. Australian National Training Authority. http://www.flexiblelearning.net.au/guides/assessment.pdf Burgess, ML, Slate, JR, Rojas‐LeBouef, A, and LaPrairie, K. (2010). Teaching and learning in Second Life: Using the Community of Inquiry (CoI) model to support online instruction with graduate students in instructional technology. Internet and Higher Education, (13) pp. 84‐88. Cabral‐Cardoso, C. and Cunha, M.P.E. (2003) The business lunch: toward a research agenda. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, (24)7 pp. 371‐379. Corrocher, N. (2010) "The adoption of Web 2.0 services: An empirical investigation", Technological Forecasting and Social Change, . Cross, J., and Hamilton, I. (2002) The DNA of e‐Learning, excerpt from Beyond e‐Learning. Accessed: March, 26, 2003 from www.internettime.com Duan, Y., He, Q., Feng, W., Li, D. and Fu, Z. (2010) "A study on e‐learning take‐up intention from an innovation adoption perspective: A case in China", Computers & Education, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 237‐246. Drinkwater, P. M., Adeline, C. M., French, S., Papamichail, K. N., and Rickards, T. (2004) Adopting a web‐based collaborative tool to support the Manchester method approach to learning. Electronic Journal on e‐Learning Volume, 2(1), 61‐68. Elgort, I. (2005) "E‐learning adoption: Bridging the chasm", Proceedings of ASCILITE. Fry, K. 2001, ‘E‐learning market and providers: some issues and prospects’, Education and Training. Vol.43, no.5, pp. 233‐ 239 Gliem, J. A., and Gliem, R. R. (2003) Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for Likert‐type scales. Midwest Research to Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, 88 Gunasekaran, A., McNeil, R. D., and Shaul, D. (2002) E‐learning: Research and applications. Industrial and Commercial Training, 34(2), 44‐53. Habiyaremye, A., and Soete, L. (2009) The global financial crisis and Africa’s" immiserizing wealth": Research notes/commentaries. Higher Education Authority. (2009) Open and Flexible Learning: HEA Position Paper. Horton, W and Horton, K. (2003) E‐learning tools and technologies: A consumer's guide for trainers, teachers, educators and instructional designers, Wiley and Sons Ĭzmirli, Ő. Ş., and Kurt, A. (2009) Basic competencies of instructional technologists. Procedia Social and Behavioral Science, (1) pp. 998‐1002. Jung, I (2005). Innovative and Good Practices of Open Distance Learning in Asia and the Pacific. UNESCO Bangkok Occasional Paper Series, (3) Knowles, M.S. (1984) Andragogy in action, San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass. Leacock, T. (2005) Building a sustainable e‐Learning development culture. The Learning Organisation, 12(4), pp. 355–367. th Leedy, P.D., and Ormrod, J.E. (2005) Practical Research Planning and Design. (8 Ed.) Pearson Education International, New Jersey Lee, S. (2001) Development of instructional strategy of computer application software for group instruction. Computer and Education, (37) pp.1‐9

262

Peter Mkhize and Magda Huisman Kanuka, H. (2004) Cognitive Presence in Online Learning. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, (15)2 pp. 30‐50. Khan, B.H. (2001) A framework for Web‐Based Learning. In B.H. Khan (Ed.), Web‐based training (pp. 75‐98). Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Mason, R., and Rennie, F. (2008) E‐learning and social networking handbook: Resources for higher education Psychology Press. Merriam, S.B. (2001) Andragogy and Self‐Directed Learning: Pillars of Adult Learning Theory. New Direction for Adult and Continuing Education, (89) Mkhize P, Lubbe S. (2005). Just because you can it doesn't mean that you should!, Alternation, 12b, 413‐428 Moore, M. M., Tait, A., Resta, P., Rumble, G., and Zaparovanny, Y. (2002) Open and distance learning: Trends, policy and strategy considerations UNESCO. Mutula, S. M. (2005) Peculiarities of the digital divide in sub‐Saharan Africa. Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems, 39(2), 122‐138. Mutula, S. M. (2008) Digital divide and economic development: Case study of sub‐Saharan Africa. Electronic Library, the, 26(4), 468‐489. Nielsen, K. (2009) A collaborative perspective on learning transfer. Journal of Workplace Learning, 21(1), 58‐70. Pityana, N. B. (2006) Address at the commencement of the academic year, 2006. Pityana, N. B. (2009) Open distance learning in the developing world: Trends, progress and challenges. Keynote Speech Delivered on the Occasion of the M–2009 23 Rd ICDE World Conference on Open Learning and Distance Education. “Flexible Education for all: Open‐Global‐Innovative, 7‐10. Prensky, M. (2004) Proposal for educational software development sites: an open source tool to create the learning software we need. On the Horizon, (12)1, pp. 41‐44. Remenyi, D., Williams, B., Money, A., and Swartz, E. (1998) Doing Research in Business and Management: An Introduction to Process and Method. London: Sage. Rogers, E.M. (1995) Diffusion of innovation, New York: Free Press. Sambrooks, S. (2003) E‐learning in small organisations. Education and Training (45)9, pp. 506‐516. Smith, B. L. and MacGregor, J. T. (1992) "What is Collaborative Learning?" In Collaborative Learning: A Sourcebook for Higher Education, p10‐‐29, A. S. Goodsell, M. R. Maher and V. Tinto ed., Univ. Park, PA, National Center on Postsecondary Teaching. Sekaran, U. (2006) Research methods for business: A skill building approach Wiley‐India. Simon Rogerson, and Christine Fidler. (1994) Strategic information systems planning: Its adoption and use. Information Management and Computer Security, 2(1), 12. Smith, B. L., and MacGregor, J. T. (2003) What is collaborative learning? Toward the Virtual University: International Online Perspectives, 219. Tennyson, R. D., and Rasch, M. (1988) Linking cognitive learning theory to instructional prescriptions. Instructional Science, 17(4), 369‐385. Tournaki, N. (2003) The differential effects of teaching addition through strategy instruction versus drill and practice to students with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36(5), 449–458. University of South Africa (2008) Open Distance Learning policy, Viewed 03 August 2011, http://staff.unisa.ac.za/index.jsp?link=http://www.unisa.ac.za/cmsys/staff/Default.asp?Cmd=ViewContentandConte ntID=2607 University of South Africa n.d. 2015 Unisa Strategic Planning: An Agenda for Transformation, Viewed 03 August 2011, http://staff.unisa.ac.za/secure/index2.jsp Venkatesh V, Davis F.D. (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science (46)2, pp. 186–204. nd Wang, Y; Du, H and Hao, Y. (2010) ‘Web‐Based Instructional Diffusion and Adoption Model’, 2 International Conference on Information Technology and Computer Science, Wenger E.C and Snyder W.M. (2000) Communities of Practice: The Organizational Frontier. Harvard Business Review, pp. 139 – 145. World Wide Worx (2012) Social Media breaks barriers in SA, viewed 25 November 2012, http://www.worldwideworx.com/socialmedia2012/ Zhang, J., Khan B.H., Gibbons, A.S., and Ni, Y. (2001) Review of Web‐based assessment tools. In B.H. Khan (ed.), Web‐based training (pp. 137‐146). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

263

Exploring Onscreen Marking for Expediting Formative Assessment Feedback in an ODL Environment Jabu Mtsweni and Hanifa Abdullah School of Computing, University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa mtswejs@unisa.ac.za abdulh@unisa.ac.za Abstract: Open Distance Learning (ODL) institutions attract a large cohort of students. In facilitating and improving learning, online and mobile technologies are often embraced, because of their ubiquity, accessibility, and wide spread use. However, some activities at ODL institutions, such as the evaluation of written assignments, still require a number of manual operated procedures. This manual nature of evaluating assessments leads to a series of challenges, including delayed feedback to students. The use of snail mail to return marked assignments to students further complicates this issue. Often, students do not receive their evaluated assignments on time leading to an unpleasant learning experience. Owing to such issues, the University of South Africa has introduced an alternative solution referred to as the Unisa Tool for Onscreen Marking (UTOM). This tool is meant to streamline the evaluation process of formative assessments and enable markers to provide timeous and meaningful feedback to students. This paper presents the preliminary results derived from an exploratory case study conducted over a period of a semester with a group of postgraduate students. The objective of the research study was to explore the potential benefits that onscreen marking, when integrated with cloud storage service, has on expediting formative assessment feedback in an ODL environment. The results from the case study suggest that onscreen marking has underlying benefits, particularly in ensuring that students receive useful and timeous feedback that promotes and improves teaching and learning. However, onscreen marking as a tool also presents some limitations, particularly when dealing with large volumes of research‐based written formative assessments. Keywords: open distance learning (ODL), onscreen marking, formative assessments, formative feedback, cloud storage services

1. Introduction and background The University of South Africa (UNISA) is one of the largest Open Distance Learning (ODL) institutions in Africa (UNISA‐Online, 2012). UNISA attracts a large cohort of students from all over Africa and the world every year. Preliminary data indicates that in 2011 over 300 000 students were enrolled at the institution; with about 90% of the students residing in South Africa (cf. Table 1) (UNISA‐Online, 2012). Table 1: UNISA student enrolments Nationality South Africa Other SADC countries Other African countries Rest of the World No Information

2009 245.512 15.682 3.815 1.505 45

2010 269.061 18.647 4.067 1.606 56

2011 (Prelim) 300.221 21.774 4.250 1.746 188

As an ODL institution, UNISA relies heavily on the telecommunications, Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs), and multimedia services to reach students all over the world, to facilitate teaching, learning, and assessment (Bouras et al., 2000). Although, UNISA claims to embrace the attitude of adapting to the fast‐paced higher education environment of the 21st century by adopting new and emerging ICTs (UNISA‐ Online, 2012), a number of activities are still labour and resource intensive. One such manual activity is the marking of formative and summative assessments. The large number of assignment submissions per module and the manual marking process lead to undesirable consequences, such as wasteful use of resources, lack of marking quality, and delayed feedback to students. As a result, UNISA has introduced a new platform using different, but integrated tools called the Unisa Tool for Onscreen Marking (UTOM) (ICT‐UNISA, 2012).The tool is meant to streamline the evaluation process of formative assessments and enable academics to evaluate and provide timeous feedback to students. Onscreen marking (OSM) has been deployed in various settings over the past few years. Coniam (2010) reported that by 2012, all public examinations in Hong King would be marked solely onscreen. On the other hand, in the UK, Cambridge Assessment piloted and invested substantial resources into OSM, for their public examination system. Studies conducted on various aspects of OSM reveal that, there are no statistical significant differences between paper‐based and onscreen marking (Coniam, 2009, Johnson,Hopkin and Shiell,

264

Jabu Mtsweni and Hanifa Abdullah 2012). At the same time, it has been derived that the method of marking does not directly affect the assessment outcome (Johnson,Nádas and Bell, 2010). Although the concept is often met with scepticism in academia, research suggest that OSM is reliable and useful (Johnson and Nádas, 2009) and is viewed to be “better than paper‐based marking approach” (Okonkwo, 2010). Nevertheless, the benefits of OSM in addressing the issues related to delayed feedback in an ODL environment have not been practically investigated. In addition, the integration of OSM with emerging online technologies, such as cloud storage services for expediting formative assessment feedback has not been explored. Thus, the main objective of the study was to explore the potential benefits that onscreen marking, when integrated with cloud storage service, have on delivering well‐timed, positive, and unambiguous feedback to students, thus promoting and improving the learning process and student development. The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: Section 2 discusses the methodology that was adopted for this specific study and the instruments used for data collection. Formative assessments, formative feedback, and the process of marking assignments within the context of ODL, especially at UNISA, are presented in Section 3. The onscreen marking toolset and related components are introduced in Section 4. In Section 5, elementary details on cloud computing, focusing on cloud storage, are summarized. Section 6 presents a discussion on the findings derived from an exploratory case study. The paper is concluded with a summary and further research in Section 7.

2. Research methodology A case study approach (Oates, 2009, Yin, 2009) was adopted to explore the benefits of the onscreen marking tool, particularly for expediting assessment feedback in an ODL environment. The rationale behind this choice is that a case study is suitable for studying in‐depth “an instance of a phenomenon” (Oates, 2009), such as an information system. Furthermore, since the onscreen marking toolset has recently been introduced in the institution, an exploratory case study could help to understand the benefits or limitations of the tool better with the possibility of exposing further research questions. Data collection during the case study took place in a form of controlled experiments, where a total of 30 formative assessment scripts were processed through the UTOM, spanning over three formative assessment periods. Indirect observations and ad‐hoc interview with selected students were also conducted.

3. Formative assessments in an ODL environment Okonkwo (2010) points out that “assessments are a systematic basis for making inferences about and increasing students’ learning and development”. This makes assessments an essential part of the teaching and learning process in any educational environment, particularly for evaluating students’ work and performance (Sadler, 1989). Generally, students in an ODL environment are deprived of opportunities of varied assessments as compared to students at residential institutions, where face to face interactions are foremost for effective tuition, learning, and assessment (Hughes, 2011). Due to the high intake of students, who are dispersed across different locations, it is always challenging to adequately and formatively assess students. In an ODL environment, students are limited by the distance (Okonkwo, 2010), rely heavily on telecoms and ICTs for interaction with academics, seldom enjoy direct contact with academics to communicate learning progress, and depend on pre‐planned formative and summative assessments that might not consider their progress and performance during the learning process. Thus, in an ODL environment, well managed and communicated formative assessments, and meaningful formative feedback (Shute, 2008) are paramount for improving students’ skills, knowledge, learning, and development (van Staden and Pilkington, 2012, Sadler, 1989, Nicol and Macfarlane‐Dick, 2006). Formative assessments can be defined as the process of progressively evaluating the quality of student’s performance against specific outcomes in order to shape the learning process (Sadler, 1989). On the other hand, formative feedback can be explained as the meaningful information communicated to students for engaging them actively in their own learning (van der Kleij et al., 2012), correcting errors, motivation (Hughes,Okumoto and Crawford, 2010), enhancing the learning process, and improving competence and understanding (van Staden and Pilkington, 2012). Within the context of UNISA, formative assessments and feedback are used extensively in almost all modules. Self‐assessments, Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs), written assignments, and portfolio of evidence are the preferred types of formative assessments by academics. MCQs are favoured partly because they are easier to administer for larger groups of students using

265

Jabu Mtsweni and Hanifa Abdullah a simple online submission process conjugated with prompt evaluation with the aid of optical mark recognition (OMC) readers. However, when it comes to written assignments and portfolios, a number of issues still remain; for instance, a large set of written assignments are submitted via different channels and manually evaluated, making it a challenge to provide timely feedback. From the UNISA students’ perspective, written assignments can be expeditiously submitted using the popular online portal (i.e. myUnisa); which can be accessed via mobile devices, rendering it available anywhere and anytime. The snail mail option can still be used to submit written assignments. However, the use of snail mail to submit written assignments is slowly diminishing; with the majority of students opting for the online route. The intensive and manual process commences once the assignments are received online or via the post, after which they are manually printed. The printed assignments are then distributed to the relevant module leaders across the designated UNISA campuses, who then distribute these to external markers for manual evaluation. The markers would return the assignments to the module leader for moderations. Generally, external markers are allotted 7 days to evaluate these written assignments; which sometimes can be in the range of 1000 assignments per module. Once the moderation process is complete, the assignments are physically returned to the assignment section for capturing on the system. Thereafter, assignments are dispatched via the snail mail to the students. This process could take up to 2 weeks to a month, and additional days for the formative feedback to reach the students. However, the assignment mark or percentage is made available immediately via the online portal and alerts are sent via the students’ e‐mail system. As may be noted, this manual process has a number of unintended administrative burdens, which has a negative impact on the assessment and feedback. The UTOM intended to address some of the issues is briefly introduced in the ensuing section.

4. Onscreen marking UTOM is an online and offline toolset that makes “digital marking, commenting and processing of written assignments possible” (ICT‐UNISA, 2012). It is licensed under the Creative Commons License.

Figure 1: UTOM marking view Referring to Figure 1, the toolset comes with the following capabilities; which are continuously being improved and extended. (1) Onscreen marking, which includes inserting of different ticks (e.g. ½ or 1) using mouse clicks or digital pens and automatic counting of tick marks and final percentages. (2) Adding feedback to different sections or questions, with features, such as a re‐usable list of flexible comments or individual comments. (3) Pre‐configured rubrics for improving consistency, accuracy, and quality of marking. (4) Support for PDF format and conversion from other formats to PDF making it less cumbersome for students to submit assignments in various formats. The toolset operates seamlessly via Adobe Acrobat Professional and Adobe Air. With regards to its functionality, the toolset has received some positive reviews from UNISA academics, with many continuing to contribute towards its improvement. As a side note: in the School of Computing about 40% of the modules are registered to use the onscreen marking tool in 2013. In the background, the tool is integrated with the software called jRouter (see Figure 2); a tool responsible for electronically routing submitted assignments via the online portal to markers assigned to a specific module. This software enables the assignments to be marked on a desktop computer, laptop, copied to a flash drive, marked offline (i.e. with no connection to jRouter) and make uploads of completed assignments later, or online marking with immediate uploads and capturing of marks. A number of technical challenges have been

266

Jabu Mtsweni and Hanifa Abdullah reported about the jRouter, some of them including that the tool is erratic, not user friendly, and has numerous technical flaws. Nevertheless, this tool is continuously being improved.

Figure 2: jRouter in action There are a number of inherent benefits for the onscreen marking toolset, especially from the markers’ perspective. (1) Security – all markers are required to login onto the marking system and every interaction with the system is logged against the marker. This could then lead to fewer challenges when it comes to misplaced and unaccounted assignments (2) Improved marking quality – since marking onscreen is real‐time, especially when connected to jRouter, marking problems can be quickly identified and corrected, and solving of any inconsistencies can also be affected at an early stage. (3) Effective allocation and tracking of scripts – since some modules might have more than one marker allocated, allocation of scripts to different markers can easily be done and tracked in real time, (4) Efficiency and Accuracy – the marker can focus on the evaluation process without being burden by mundane administrative tasks such as, adding marks and calculating percentages; leading to higher efficiency, further reducing a number of human errors prevalent in manual processes. (5) Proper resource management – the costs that come with printing a large set of assignments for many modules can be greatly reduced as every assignment is marked digitally. Proper numbers of scripts that different markers actually mark can also be easily accounted for. Despite the benefits from the marker’s perspective, there is a lack of literature available on the potential benefits that the onscreen marking system has from the student’s perspective. In this paper, the overarching objective is to explore these benefits underlying the onscreen marking system, particularly with regard to simplifying the process of providing specific and timeous feedback to students. In the next section, the preliminaries surrounding cloud computing in an ODL environment are discussed in line with the sub‐objective of the study, which is to examine the possibilities of seamlessly integrating cloud storage services and UTOM to expedite formative assessment feedback.

5. Cloud computing in an ODL environment According to Rong, Nguyen, and Jaatun (2012), “cloud computing is a platform‐independent model that is meant to provide convenient and on‐demand access to a shared pool of configurable computing resources”. This model of computing can be configured in different ways offering different services (Sultan, 2010, Rong,Nguyen and Jaatun., 2012) to organizations and individuals. For instance, cloud computing can be configured as: (1) Software as a Service (SaaS). In this regard, different software applications are delivered over the Internet as a service on demand‐basis and users either pay for the resources used or the time spent in accessing specific resources. This is the common type of cloud computing model in many organizations, such as Amazon, Microsoft, and Google. (2) Platform as a Service (PaaS), where a software platform is offered as a service over the Internet. This could include platforms such as, the development platforms. One good and

267

Jabu Mtsweni and Hanifa Abdullah common example of PaaS is Google Apps; “a messaging and collaboration cloud platform” (Sultan, 2010). (3) Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), this service includes “remote delivery of a full and virtualized infrastructure, such as virtual computers, servers, and storage devices” (Sultan, 2010). These services can be offered using a combination of deployment mechanisms, depending on the target market and purpose. The mechanisms are generally classified as private ‐ a cloud set up and owned or rented by an organization for its private use, public ‐ owned by a service provider and resources can be accessed by the public either for free or at a cost. An example in this case would be Google Apps, community ‐ resources are shared amongst the members of a closed community for their common purpose, and hybrid – a combination of two or more cloud infrastructures, with the objective of providing extra resource in cases of high demand (Rong,Nguyen and Jaatun., 2012). Cloud computing as a growing phenomenon is also finding great relevance in an ODL environment, mainly due to the widespread use of the Internet and proliferation of mobile devices amongst the students and academics (Chung et al., 2012). One of the numerous benefits of cloud computing is the potential of cost savings, since organizations only pay for what they use. This could provide institutions, especially ODL‐based, who are always pressed when it comes to resources, with opportunities to continue to embrace new technologies at manageable costs (Sultan, 2010). Extensive research has also been done within the education sector about the relevance of cloud computing in the teaching and learning environment. A number of recognized learning institutions also recognize the benefits of the cloud, particularly in improving efficiency, convenience, and costs (Sultan, 2010). Furthermore, there is now a shift towards e‐assessments in the cloud (Mkrtchyan, 2011). In an ODL environment, the most relevant and beneficial cloud computing service is cloud storage; which is the most exploited type of cloud services by Internet users. It is mainly used for storage of data, such as documents. It should also be noted that many of the cloud storage services for individual users can be accessed without paying a fee. These services can also be easily accessible using different types of mobile devices, particularly smartphones (Chung et al., 2012). This is possible because all the processing happens in the cloud rather than on clients’ devices. The most prevalent cloud storage services today are Dropbox (Chung et al., 2012), Google Drive, and Sky Drive. Dropbox has found its way into a number of universities across the world, through its initiative of giving free cloud storage space to registered users. Dropbox users have an option to either work offline or online. When working offline, the user could add files and folders into a local directory structure and Dropbox would automatically synchronize all new files into the cloud. Synchronized folders and files could then be accessed from any device, including mobile phones (Chung et al., 2012). When using only the online version, registered users can access their storage space using any device with the capability of accessing a Web browser. In both versions, event logs are kept on the local storage and on Dropbox website for efficient tracking and recovery. C urrently at UNISA the onscreen marking toolset is used in conjunction with the online portal (i.e. myUnisa) for submission of assignments by students. Once submitted, these assignments are electronically routed to the marking toolset via the jRouter software as discussed. In this paper, one of the other objectives pursued was the integration of a cloud storage service, namely Dropbox and UTOM, in an effort to expedite the provision of the formative feedback to students. This was done to circumvent some of the technical challenges that have been reported with regard to the proper functioning of jRouter. In the following section, we discuss the preliminary findings of this study focusing on the onscreen marking toolset and the integration of the cloud storage service.

6. Discussion 6.1 Case study The case study was based on a group of postgraduate students and one marker. The module selected was an Honours projects module, focusing on research writing. The module was chosen because it was one of the modules that were part of the onscreen marking pilot project, and was in the process of being migrated to be offered only online. Secondly, the type of formative assessments planned for the aforementioned module provided us with the flexibility of using the onscreen marking toolset under different conditions, particularly with regard to marking different types of formative assessments (e.g. short questions and long essays). Three formative assessments were planned for the module. Assignment 1 required students to submit a short research proposal on a selected topic. Assignment 2 was an extension of assignment 1, where students were required to present in a written form preliminary literature on the selected topic. Assignment 3 was the final

268

Jabu Mtsweni and Hanifa Abdullah submission and constituted a final research report. In terms of participants, there were 10 students that participated in the case study throughout the offering of this module. The number of participants could be seen as relatively small, however for this case study it was found to be sufficient, since the focus was more on exploring the onscreen marking tool to determine if there are any benefits in expediting feedback than solving the issue of marking a large set of assignments. Using the exploratory case study approach, data was collected by evaluating, using the onscreen marking toolset, three formative assessments as discussed above, submitted via Dropbox at different periods during the semester. In this regard, the selected students were asked to create a free online Dropbox account for purposes of submitting their assignments using the cloud. Once the accounts were created, students were individually linked using their email addresses to a repository in our Dropbox account. Students were also encouraged to submit their assignments in a PDF format. However, other versions were still permitted. Insightful data was then collected by experimenting with the onscreen marking tool in a real‐life setting (Yin, 2009), using official formative assessments. Additional data was collected during the process of providing feedback and handling ad‐hoc queries from students on formative feedback. Other data gathering instruments exploited were the analysis of the podcasts; which provided rich insights into the inner workings of both the onscreen marking toolset and the jRouter. User manuals were also analysed and ad‐hoc interviews with students, engaging with the feedback.

6.2 Marking process The marking process wa s planned to start once the assignments where pushed or submitted by the students into the cloud storage service by the due date. In this instance, students needed only to push or upload the assignment file into the dedicated space in Dropbox. The process of submission was further made seamless as students did not need to send any email to the lecturers or print the assignment documents for manual submission. Students needed to only push their finalized assignment into the local Dropbox folder or upload via the website. In the background, the assignment would then be automatically synchronized with the Dropbox of the lecturers. If the assignment was submitted in a pdf format as recommended, it will be opened directly with the onscreen marking toolset, and the marking process would commence. In all assessments that formed part of the experiments, rubrics were used for allocating marks to different sections to ensure consistent marking. Comments for different sections were also pre‐set, and copied as needed whilst marking the assignments.

Figure 3: Automatic calculations The marking process was in many instances quite straight forward, almost similar to when marking using pen and paper with added simplifications, such as automatic calculations of all ticks and percentages. The results would then be automatically added at the end of the assignment for the benefit of the student (cf. Figure 3). For purposes of this study, the capturing of marks still followed the manual route, as the cloud storage service used for the experiments was not integrated with the jRouter or myUnisa. Although, we did not focus on the time it took to mark each assignment as compared to the manual process, it was noticed that marking onscreen does not necessarily make the marking process faster, except when it came to the process of

269

Jabu Mtsweni and Hanifa Abdullah calculating the ticks and percentages. From related work, it is however suggested that reading texts for longer periods might be a challenge onscreen than on‐paper (Johnson,Nádas and Bell, 2010).

6.3 Formative feedback According to Shute (2008), formative feedback needs to be specific, supportive, and timely. Thus, researchers believe that immediate feedback is important in improving students’ learning process (Okonkwo, 2010, Sadler, 1989, Shute, 2008). The experiments and observations during the case study, suggested that the UTOM does have the potential to expedite formative assessment feedback, particularly when integrated with cloud storage services. Any marking changes that were made to the assignments after queries from some students were also instantly pushed back via the cloud storage service. This means that as the marker was marking the assignment and saving the final results, students could immediately access and view the feedback, and in some instances act upon it (e.g. correct the errors and resubmit the assignment for re‐evaluation). The opportunity for re‐evaluation was afforded in assignment 1 and assignment 2. In assignment 3, an improved performance was observed across all the students who participated in the study. However, this cannot be directly linked to the tool, but an assertion can be made that such a tool does have the potential to accelerate the manner in which formative feedback is sent to students.

6.4 Benefits and limitations A number of benefits and some limitations were observed whilst experimenting with the onscreen marking toolset integrated with the cloud storage service. Some of the benefits and limitations were also derived from the ad‐hoc interviews with the students. The integration of the UTOM and Dropbox was found to be cost‐effective to students as they were not compelled to print a pile of documents for submission. Response rate to students’ queries on specific assignments was found to be quicker when using the cloud storage service and the UTOM. Students were also able to easily track their submissions via visual logs, automatic synchronization, and the alert feature in Dropbox. The fact that students could access the cloud storage service from any device and at any time also ensured that students receive feedback without even waiting for an electronic mail informing them that the assignment has been marked. On the downside, marking essay assignments proved to be strenuous because of attentive reading, which sometimes is not comfortable on a computer screen. During ad‐hoc interviews with some students, it was noted that some feedback was found to be too generic, thus not adequately contributing to the learning and development process. In addition, it was impossible to enforce deadlines within the cloud storage service, since the tool did not provide these features. Hence, one of the future possibilities is to investigate the integration of the online portal with the cloud storage service.

7. Conclusion ODL institutions are continuously embracing technologies that could automate a number of manual procedures and improve the process of learning; ultimately leading to improved students’ performance. Thus, in order to address the challenges that come with the manual mode of receiving and evaluating formative assessments, UNISA has introduced UTOM (Unisa tool for Onscreen Marking) to streamline the process of evaluating formative assessments. This paper explored UTOM and its integration with cloud storage services to determine if there are any underlying benefits when using such a tool to minimize the time it takes for the feedback to reach remote students. The preliminary findings of the study suggest that UTOM, when integrated with on‐demand and readily available technologies such as cloud computing, does have the potential to streamline the marking process and also expedite formative assessment feedback. Although the process of marking digitally has its own limitations, it was found that as a new approach, it needed to be explored particularly for ensuring that students receive assessment feedback on time. In terms of further research, various possibilities exist such as doing a comparative study to evaluate the actual time differences between marking onscreen and on paper, and the impact of this on providing timely feedback to students

References Bouras, C., Destounis, P., Garofalakis, J., Gkamas, A., Sakalis, G., Sakkopoulos, E., Tsaknakis, J. & Tsiatsos, T. 2000. Efficient web‐based open and distance learning services. Telematics and Informatics, 17, 213‐237. Chung, H., Park, J., Lee, S. & Kang, C. 2012. Digital forensic investigation of cloud storage services. Digital Investigation, 9 81–95.

270

Jabu Mtsweni and Hanifa Abdullah Coniam, D. 2009. A comparison of onscreen and paper‐based marking in the Hong Kong public examination system. Educational Research and Evaluation, 15, 243‐263. Coniam, D. 2010. Validating onscreen marking. Asia Pacific Education Review, 11, 423‐431. Hughes, G. 2011. Towards a personal best: a case for introducing ipsative assessment in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 36. Hughes, G., Okumoto, K. & Crawford, M. 2010. Ipsative assessment and motivation of distance learners. Center for distance education teaching and research awards Round 5 University of London, Faculty of Policy and Society, Institute of Education. Ict‐Unisa. 2012. The Unisa Tool for Onscreen Marking (UTOM) [Online]. UNISA. Available: http://www.unisa.ac.za/Default.asp?Cmd=ViewContent&ContentID=23049 [Accessed 14 January 2013 2013]. Johnson, M., Hopkin, R. & Shiell, H. 2012. Marking Extended Essays on Screen: exploring the link between marking processes and comprehension. E‐Learning and Digital Media, 9, 50‐68. Johnson, M. & Nádas, R. 2009. Research Matters:an investigation into marker reliability and some qualitative aspects of on‐ screen marking. Cambridge, United Kingdom. Johnson, M., Nádas, R. & Bell, J. F. 2010. Marking essays on screen: An investigation into the reliability of marking extended subjective texts. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41, 814‐826. Mkrtchyan, A. e‐Assessment model based on cloud computing architecture. 4th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovations (ICERI), 2011 Madrid, Spain. Nicol, D. & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. 2006. Rethinking Formative Assessment in HE: a theoretical model and seven principles of good feedback practice [Online]. Available: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/assessment/web0015_rethinking_formative_assessment_in_he.pd f [Accessed 14 January 2013]. Oates, J. B. 2009. Researching Information Systems and Computing, Los Angeles, SAGE. Okonkwo, C. A. 2010. Sustainable assessment and evaluation strategies for open and distance learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 11, 6. Rong, C., Nguyen, S. T. & Jaatun., M. G. 2012. Beyond lightning: A survey on security challenges in cloud computing. Computers & Electrical Engineering. Sadler, D. R. 1989. Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 119‐144. Shute, V. J. 2008. Focus on Formative Feedback. Review of Educational Research Journal, 78, 153‐189. Sultan, N. 2010. Cloud computing for education: A new dawn? International Journal of Information Management, 30, 109‐ 116. Unisa‐Online. 2012. About Unisa [Online]. UNISA. Available: http://www.unisa.ac.za/default.asp?Cmd=ViewContent&ContentID=3 [Accessed 15 January 2013]. Van Der Kleij, F. M., Eggen, T. J. H. M., Timmers, C. F. & Veldkamp, B. P. 2012. Effects of feedback in a computer‐based assessment for learning. Computers & Education, 58, 263‐272. Van Staden, J. C. W. & Pilkington, C. L. Test‐driven development as a form of ipsative feedback in an ODL environment. 1st Unisa International Open Distance Learning (ODL) Conference, 2012 Pretoria, South Africa. Yin, R. K. 2009. Case Study Research ‐ design and methods, SAGE Publications.

271

Cyber Safety Education: Towards a Cyber‐Safety Awareness Framework for Primary Schools Thirumala Naidoo, Elmarie Kritzinger and Marianne Loock Unisa, Pretoria, South Africa malanaidoo9@gmail.com, kritze@unisa.ac.za, loockm@unisa.ac.za Abstract: Online and social media play a major role in children’s lives, while communication devices such as cell phones, personal computers, iPads and personal digital assistants (PDAs) are enabling children to communicate effectively with each other. However, the advancement of technological systems and new software presents opportunities to criminal elements in society to attempt to cause harm to unsuspecting users. This situation is even more serious when those users are children who have not been taught how to protect themselves. The purpose of this paper is to present a cyber –safety awareness framework that can be used as a viable means of introducing cyber safety awareness education to primary school children in the South African community. The framework proposes that schools be grouped into clusters, with a cluster coordinator as its head, elected by teacher representatives of each specific cluster. Cyber safety awareness information is distributed through a series of workshops and information sharing sessions attended by teacher representatives of these school clusters, and distributed back through to parents, children and other teachers from their schools and eventually to their communities. Implementing the framework in the South African community would therefore introduce a coordinated approach to confronting possible cyber security risks and thus create a cyber safe environment for kids to work in, where currently none exists. Keywords: cyber safety, education, cyber safety awareness, framework

1. Introduction Teenagers spend a significant amount of their time interacting with others on social networking sites (Ahn 2011). Social networking may be defined as a process of linking a user through a network to a social group of people with common interests for the purpose of sharing ideas, experiences and emotions (Dangwal and Kapur 2009). Some of the popular social networking sites used by children include Facebook, Friendster, Mxit, Twitter and MySpace, while posting pictures on their profiles, writing messages on “friends’” walls and chatting with “friends” are a few examples of the activities in which children engage once they are logged onto social network sites. However, the following question arises, namely, “How can communication with one’s friends be regarded as a threat to one’s safety?” The threat to children’s safety comes about when children communicate with “friends” who are not actually close contacts but who are, instead, the result of associations made through online interaction. The danger that lurks is that “online friends” may not always turn out to be whom they say they are. Children do not realise the dangers involved in posting personal information online (Barnes 2006) and they do not appear to understand that the internet represents a public space where information may be accessed by almost anybody. The safety of the children may then be compromised; especially having not designated their profiles as private. Information about these children then becomes accessible to the public online community and, thus, to everybody in the global community. Children also, seldom realise that certain pictures or content may be viewed as offensive and may get either them or their friends into trouble. Once information is posted onto websites, it is not possible to remove it and it may, at a later stage, be manipulated to damage personal character traits (Childnet International 2008). As a result of insufficient emphasis on the teaching and learning of safe internet practices in schools, homes and communities, children are deprived of important education regarding what constitutes both safe and unsafe internet use. Many education platforms do not stress sufficiently the need for safe internet use on the part of children. Children are often unaware of possible attacks that result from the unsafe use of social networking platforms. Threats include (Hunter 2008):

Phishing attacks in order to gain access to passwords and banking details

Infection of systems by malware

Cyber bullying by peers and other internet users

272

Thirumala Naidoo, Elmarie Kritzinger and Marianne Loock

Interaction with pedophiles whose intention it is to prey on innocent children

Exposure to the viewing of inappropriate content

Viruses, for example, the Orkit virus which hijacks user accounts so that messages can be read on the social network.

In order to avoid facing risks associated with online activities, many schools try to avoid jeopardising the safety of children by blocking access to social networks (Lemke et al 2009). However, this is not the solution to the problem of “safety”, as it is the parents who have to address any problems that may arise and they are frequently unable to handle the safety violations or crimes involving social networks due to their lack of knowledge on cyber safety issues (Ahn 2011). The reality is that, if the school curriculum allowed for education on cyber safety awareness, then the rate at which cyber crimes occur should clearly diminish. The cyber safety awareness framework is responsible for ultimately educating children, parents, teachers and communities on how to practise safety when engaged in online activities.

2. Current status of awareness of South Africans with regard to using social networking and online systems safely The Centre of Justice and Crime Prevention (CJCP) conducted a study on a sample population of 1 726 people aged between 12 and 26, from urban environments in the Western Cape, Eastern Cape, KwaZulu‐Natal and Gauteng. (Burton and Mutongwiza 2009).

Figure 1: Access and usage of electronic media among young South Africans Some of the results indicate that:

the highest level of access to the internet was through cell phones.

64% of people access the internet Mxit.

There has been a number of research projects conducted in different parts of South Africa to investigate the level of awareness of children with regard to information security and cyber security issues when working on the internet. One such study was undertaken by a master’s student at the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (NMMU). This study involved three primary and three secondary school and included a total of 1 594 children. The learners, who ranged from Grade 6 to Grade 12, were required to complete questionnaires regarding their internet usage. Some of the results reported were as follows:

273

Thirumala Naidoo, Elmarie Kritzinger and Marianne Loock

Figure 2: Data from survey Source: http://nmmu.ac.za/default.asp?id=416&did=317&nid=2707&mod=newsdetail&gh=News&np=1&bhcp=1) The sample of children represented in the survey appeared to be accessing the internet either with or without the permission and supervision of their parents. In many instances children are more technologically advanced than their parents or guardians. However, being technologically advanced does not necessarily mean that they are aware of the possible risks involved when they access either the internet or social networking sites. It is patently obvious that teenagers will engage in online activities, either with or without their parents’ permission. According to the results of the survey, 54% of the children enjoy unsupervised access to the internet, whilst 63% do not have to ask permission when using the internet. With such a large percentage of children accessing online activities without supervision, the likelihood of cyber attacks occurring becomes even greater. However, if children were educated about safe internet practice, they would be better equipped to handle cyber bullying or other attacks, should they occur.

3. What are the obvious barriers that South Africans face when practising safe social networking? There a number of barriers that South Africans face when attempting to practise safe social networking.

3.1 Cost of internet access Internet access in South Africa is not free and subscribers to the internet spend a considerable amount of money on access, depending on the type of connectivity users select which may include ADSL, HSDPA, GPRS or 3G. ICT Africa‐Policy Brief 1 (2008) conducted a survey in 17 African countries on the e‐access and usage of a number of households. The preliminary findings on South Africa indicated that the ownership of personal computers and connectivity to the internet in South Africa remain low.

274

Thirumala Naidoo, Elmarie Kritzinger and Marianne Loock

Figure 3: Preliminary findings of the survey on internet usage in South Africa The results of internet usage (as indicated by the chart above) in South Africa indicate that:

36% of the people access the internet at cybercafés.

25% access the internet at work.

23% access the internet at school, university or the library.

16% access the internet at home or through friends or mobile phones.

It appeared that the ability to afford access to the internet was to children from the less poor areas in South Africa, as well as to children whose parents belonged to the higher income groups. The cost of using cell phones is extremely high (ICT Africa Policy Brief 1 2008)

3.2 Lack of qualified teachers Children spend a considerable part of their week at school and, thus, incorporating an awareness of online safety into the school syllabus would be extremely beneficial, especially for those children who do not have internet access at home. However, not all teachers are as computer literate as they may be expected to be and, in many cases, children are often more advanced in the use of technology than their educators.

3.3 Lack of parental involvement in educating children on cyber safety The standard of living in the 21st century is extremely high. In order to sustain a family, it is often necessary for both parents to work and earn an income. Some parents find it difficult to work and supervise their children. According to Shipton (2011), some parents also do not actually believe that the child may be at risk when accessing the internet when they are in the same room as the child.

4. Proposed cyber safety awareness framework The cyber safety awareness framework being proposed in this article plans to use Penreach, an outreach organisation as a medium to channel the cyber awareness programme into rural schools. Concurrently, a schedule of coordinated meeting sessions amongst teachers of urban schools will make possible the implementation of a cyber awareness programme into urban schools. Through Penreach’s eight coordinated meeting sessions, scheduled throughout the duration of a year, rural teachers are initially educated on cyber safety awareness, after which time, they would then be held responsible for the promotion and maintenance of cyber security awareness education of children from rural schools in both Mpumalanga and Limpopo Province. Mpumalanga Province, in common with other provinces, faces several challenges with regard to the implementation of a cyber safety awareness programme. Many urban primary schools possess the necessary resources in terms of qualified personnel and networked computer facilities, as well as access to the internet,

275

Thirumala Naidoo, Elmarie Kritzinger and Marianne Loock which is required to facilitate the teaching and learning of cyber safety awareness issues during school hours. However, many rural primary schools lack the infrastructure for teaching computer literacy. Classrooms are equipped with desks, chairs and a blackboard. They do not have a computer room with networked computers. They also lack access to the internet due to the absence of broadband, Wi‐Fi or any other type of telecommunication infrastructure. These rural schools do not have teachers qualified to teach computer literacy. Many of the teachers lack basic computer literacy skills. Hence the intervention of the Penreach organisation, one of whose current roles includes attempting to improve the technological and educational resources in rural schools in Mpumalanga. The upgrading of technological resources in rural schools as well as creation of networked computer facilities certainly makes it possible for rural educators to be able to facilitate the learning of cyber safety awareness amongst pupils and staff.

4.1 How does the cyber safety awareness framework work? The cyber safety awareness framework may be implemented in primary schools and can also be adapted for use in high schools. This framework proposes that schools from a particular province be grouped into clusters, with a cluster comprising a grouping of schools based on certain specific criteria. An example of criteria which could be used as a basis of grouping clusters is their close proximity to each other. The purpose of the cluster grouping of schools presents a practical opportunity for teachers to meet and distribute information on cyber safety awareness to their respective schools in the province. Each school would be represented by one of its delegated educators, as the cluster member, at a specific meeting. Every cluster, which consists of a group of schools, must elect a cluster coordinator essentially an educator whose responsibility it would be to schedule meetings, coordinate the communication process, ensure that information is disseminated to cluster members and also provide feedback based on the problems and successes encountered at a specific school or at schools in general. This feedback may be communicated to other cluster coordinators and this, in turn, would allow for a process of remediation to follow. The committee of cluster coordinators would have the following responsibilities:

Schedule the dates of the cluster meetings during the course of the year.

Decide on topics to discuss with cluster members during scheduled workshop sessions.

Arrange for material to be compiled for distribution to the clusters, and which would then be filtered down to schools and then to communities.

Distribute workshops topics among the different clusters so that each cluster can coordinate a specific topic dealing with cyber awareness.

Coordinate projects in which clusters would engage with communities in order to promote safe social networking.

The use of clusters and cluster coordinators in the framework makes it possible for information to be effectively and easily disseminated to all schools in the province, provided that all parties are equally committed to their roles and functions in the process. In figure 5.1 below, the significance of two directional arrows, is that the proposed cyber safety awareness framework allows for the dual communication of information. Information may be communicated in the following two ways:

Filtering down from the committee of cluster coordinators via cluster members (teacher representatives) to schools and then to the children and the community.

An information flow, based on the needs of the children and the community, through to the school cluster members who would discuss cyber security awareness needs at their meetings while solutions proposed at cluster coordinators meeting may be filtered back down to the children and the community.

Cluster 1, according to figure 5.1, represents educators from schools in close proximity to each other, who meet to discuss problems that affect their schools and communities with regard to cyber safety issues. For the purposes of this article, let us assume that one of the problems experienced in schools of the same area for example cluster 1, is a high rate of cyber bullying caused by a combination of fellow school pupils as well as externally. These cyber bullying problems or concerns can be represented by the coordinator of cluster 1 at the meeting of cluster coordinators. The suggestions or proposed solutions made at the cluster coordinator

276

Thirumala Naidoo, Elmarie Kritzinger and Marianne Loock meeting can be communicated back to educators from cluster 1, who can then implement proposed solutions in their schools and communities. Likewise other decisions taken at cluster coordinator level concerning cyber safety awareness can be communicated back to their respective schools. The sharing of information amongst clusters can then used to create a sense of “what works and what doesn’t”. Proposed solutions that do not work can then be brainstormed until a possible solution to the problem is reached. Other clusters would mirror the operation of cluster 1.

Figure 4: Proposed cyber safety awareness framework For schools that lack information on specific areas regarding cyber safety education, the cyber safety awareness framework could provide the avenue through which various workshops may be held throughout the course of the year. The workshops could serve the purpose of distributing resource material to educators (cluster members), as well provide educators with ideas on how to teach themes involving cyber safety education. Although workshops intended in the framework could easily include suggestions of teaching methods on any topic involving computer literacy, for the purposes of this article, mention of workshop merits focuses on the teaching cyber safety awareness. Below are some examples of topics that workshop facilitators could provide information and teaching methodology on.

the internet and its uses

the benefits and dangers of the internet

general online safety practices

the different means of engaging in online communication (chat facilities, e‐mail)

what a social network is and how to use such media safely and responsibly

the different types of cyber threat and how to prevent or confront them

ethical practices involving online use

the role of the school in educating children about cyber safety

the involvement of the community in promoting cyber safety

ways to promote cyber safety in the school environment.

There are a number of ways in which cyber awareness education in schools may be enforced. Computer literacy lessons may be structured to include both cyber awareness and awareness of how to use social networking systems safely. Awareness within schools could become a priority through arranging a “Cyber safety Awareness Week” through which emphasis can be placed on cyber safety awareness which could serves as a means to constantly remind children to practise cyber safety. Community initiatives could also be coordinated with the schools to remind children about cyber safety education.

277

Thirumala Naidoo, Elmarie Kritzinger and Marianne Loock

4.2 Implementation of proposed cyber safety awareness framework in urban primary schools and communities The cyber safety awareness framework provides an opportunity for urban schools in the province to share resources and create a sense of consistency in terms of subject matter that is taught to children. In order to implement the suggested framework, schools in the province need to meet at the beginning of a year to coordinate clusters and to appoint cluster leaders. Specific themes or topics associated with cyber safety awareness can be allocated to each school within a cluster. The facilitation of workshops could be coordinated by cluster coordinators, whereby allocated topics can be presented to other educators and the resource material compiled could be distributed regionally. This information would be distributed through computer literacy lessons within each individual school, to children. The concept of distributing topics on cyber safety awareness, allows each theme to be prepared at length by a specific educator since the focus is on one specific topic instead of a range of topics. This allows for information to be shared and also reduces the workload for each specific school. It also creates a sense of consistency in terms of information that is distributed, across schools. Workshops focusing on teaching an awareness of cyber safety to the teachers of urban schools at Mpumalanga schools could take the form of a series of sessions held throughout the course of the year, held at a designated school’s computer room, with teachers receiving hands‐on experience on cyber safety related topics. Workbooks, theory handouts and a suggested curriculum would be given out to teachers to provide them with possible lesson plans and a teaching methodology. Another valuable aspect of workshops is that teachers would be able to exchange their contact information, thus enabling them to network with facilitators and with each other. This would also make it easier for them to communicate with each other more frequently. Parents could also be involved in training sessions in order to provide them with information on how to deal with issues concerning cyber safety. In this way the community would also be involved.

4.3 The role players involved in the cyber safety awareness framework There are a number of role players who are responsible for the education of children in schools with these role players playing a crucial role in educating children about cyber safety through the implementation of a cyber safety awareness framework. The cyber safety awareness framework requires the interaction of the following role players:

Government involvement through policies and legislation.

The Department of Education

School governing bodies

Facilitators (teachers) of Mpumalanga province

Penreach outreach programme

Community surrounding the urban/rural schools

Children from the urban/rural schools

Parents of children from the urban/rural schools

Neighbouring businesses

It is absolutely essential that all role players understand the importance of cyber awareness in the lives of children as this will enable them to work together towards establishing a safe cyber environment for children.

4.4 Penreach’s role in the proposed cyber safety awareness framework Penreach has achieved huge success in making a difference and improving the quality of education in rural communities. In view of the fact that communication with teachers in the rural communities in Mpumalanga is not always an easy task, Penreach will play a support role in the facilitation of communication amongst rural schools as well as scheduling meeting times and workshops for the schools belonging to clusters in the rural areas.

278

Thirumala Naidoo, Elmarie Kritzinger and Marianne Loock Penreach currently schedules workshops for teachers from the rural communities that are facilitated by teachers from neighbouring urban schools in Nelspruit, White River and other areas which are close by. For the purpose of this article, the volunteer teachers from urban schools who will be facilitating the workshops will be referred to as facilitators. At these workshops, resources are shared with the teachers from rural communities in order to equip them with better methods and information to improve the education in their classrooms. According to the proposed cyber safety awareness framework, neighbouring schools can be grouped into the same cluster. Through Penreach’s communication system, schools in rural areas could send their educators to Penreach meeting sessions at the beginning of the year and, in this way, facilitate the formation of clusters. Future meetings sessions could coincide with Penreach’s scheduled workshops dates. Each of the clusters could elect its own cluster coordinator at the initial meeting. The role of each cluster coordinator would be to facilitate communication between teachers from different schools and to distribute information from the facilitators of the Penreach workshops to their schools, children and communities. Similarly, cluster coordinators from the rural communities could schedule more frequent meetings outside of the Penreach workshops, should the need arise. Further communication between cluster coordinators with regard to the distribution of information or the compilation of teaching material could take place during the meetings scheduled for all the cluster coordinators in the province. Penreach provides a support role as regards communication with schools in the outlying areas, with such communication becoming a reality through the scheduling of approximately eight workshops in a year. Workshops would not only provide an opportunity for cluster coordinators to meet but would also enable education and learning to take place amongst the coordinators. The resultant information could then be relayed back to other cluster members and then to the schools, learners and communities of each cluster members.

4.5 Is cyber safety awareness education really necessary at South African schools? Many South African companies are being faced with an increase rate of cyber crime, which is often not reported. Since there are currently no laws or regulations that require these cyber crimes to be reported, many corporate victims avoid reporting incidents of security breach due to the potential loss of public support in these companies (ITNews Africa 2012). South Africa was rated after America and Britain, as the country experiencing the highest volumes of phishing attempts by the Anti Fraud Command Centre (Von Sohms 2011). A comprehensive study of cyber crime conducted in South Africa by a global leader in information security and forensics training, revealed that the victims who are most likely to be easy targets for cyber attacks are the elderly, children and in general users who are guilty of sharing too much personal information on websites and social networking sites (IT Web 2012). Introducing a cyber safety awareness programme in school is absolutely essential in order to teach children how to avoid a cyber attack or how to deal with one should it occur. Cyber awareness education can incorporate aspects like phishing, cyber bullying, different types of malware as well as how to differentiate between appropriate and inappropriate content. Through a discussion of these and other cyber safety related topics, children will become better prepared to cope with cyber safety in general.

4.6 Benefits of the cyber safety awareness framework The cyber safety awareness framework allows for the two‐way distribution of cyber safety information, with information flowing from the committee of cluster coordinators via cluster members (teacher representative) to schools, and then to children and the community. In addition, the cyber safety awareness framework allows for information to flow from children and communities through to the schools, via the cluster members (teacher representatives), to the committee of cluster coordinator. The cyber safety awareness framework offers the following benefits:

A consistent curriculum comprising aspects of cyber safety awareness education may be taught to children in schools throughout the province as all schools would be communicating via the series of cluster committees.

Through the constant communication, any cyber safety issues that arise may be dealt with by the cluster committees and solutions found which may be implemented in both schools and communities.

279

Thirumala Naidoo, Elmarie Kritzinger and Marianne Loock

Rural communities may also be reached through the intervention of Penreach, whose role it is to enhance the level of general education in rural schools.

Resource material and lesson planning can be coordinated by allocating one topic or theme involving cyber safety awareness per teacher in each school belonging to a cluster. Each teacher can be responsible for preparing lessons on their specific topic allocated to them. The prepared resource material and lesson plans can then be distributed to teachers of other schools. In this way, the workload per teacher is reduced, whilst allowing for a range of ideas to be expressed through lessons prepared by different teachers.

There is currently no set curriculum for computer literacy in schools. The cyber safety awareness framework provides a means through which teachers of computer literacy could meet and devise a consistent curriculum for computer literacy for schools.

Cyber safety awareness is lacking not only in schools but also in communities. The cyber safety awareness framework could bridge this gap through the implementation of combined school and community projects targeting cyber safety awareness.

Cyber safety awareness education may be effectively disseminated within a province through the cyber safety awareness framework, which could also be adapted so that it can be implemented in the other provinces in South Africa, thus resulting in a consistent form of cyber safety education being implemented by all provinces in South Africa.

5. Conclusion An important aspect of cyber awareness education is the ability to teach children how to use online facilities safely. In order to widen cyber safety awareness, it is essential that the various role players also be educated on possible online risks when using the internet, chat facilities and other communication mediums, as well as how to prevent or deal with such risks should they arise. The awareness framework discussed in this article proposes a means by which teachers, communities, governing bodies, learners and schools may teach each other about cyber safety by spreading information through the channels of the schools and their surrounding communities. Through the creation of clusters which consist of representatives from different schools, it becomes possible to distribute cyber awareness information throughout an area. In addition, cluster groups and the Penreach structure make it possible for workshops to be held at which teachers, communities, learners and schools who lack awareness of cyber safety practices, may become more educated. The frequent scheduling of cluster meetings ensure that schools maintain constant communication with each other with regard to problems that may exist and also how to devise solutions for any such cyber safety problems. This, in turn, led to the discussion about the implementation of the proposed awareness framework in primary schools in the Mpumalanga area, with a possibility of including other areas at a later stage. A prototype of the cyber awareness model has been developed and will be implemented this year in schools in Mpumalanga province.

References Ahn, J. (2011) "The effect of social network sites on adolescents' social and academic development: Current theories and controversies", Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 62, no. 8, pp. 1435‐ 1445. Barnes, Susan B. (2006) "A privacy paradox: Social networking in the United States." First Monday 11.9: 11‐15. Burton, Patrick (2008) "Dealing with school violence in South Africa." Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention Issue Paper 4. Burton, P. & Mutongwizo, T. (2009), Inescapable violence: Cyberbullying and electronic violence against young people in South Africa, Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention. Childnet International. (2008), Young people and social networking services: A Childnet International Research Report, Childnet International. Cyber crime now a serious and costly threat in South Africa 2012, 17 October 2012‐last update [Homepage of IT Web], [Online]. Available: http://www.itweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=59355 [2013, February 24].

280

Thirumala Naidoo, Elmarie Kritzinger and Marianne Loock Cyber security amongst school children, 24 January 2011‐last update [Homepage of Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University(School of ICT)], [Online]. Available: http://sict.nmmu.ac.za/News/Cyber‐security‐amongst‐school‐children [2013, 20 February 2013]. Dangwal, R. & Kapur, P. (2009), "Social networking effect at ‘Hiwel’ kiosks among children", Multicultural Education and Technology Journal, 3(4), 290–305. http://web.idrc.ca/uploads/user‐S/12118248191RIA‐2008 PolicyBrief_SouthAfrica.pdf Hunter, P. (2008), "Social networking: The focus for new threats — and old ones", Computer Fraud & Security, 2008 (7), 17–18. ICT Access & Usage in South Africa 2008, May 17, Research ICT Africa, http://web.idrc.ca/uploads/user‐S/12118248191RIA‐ 2008‐PolicyBrief_SouthAfrica.pdf Kganyago, K. (2013), "How serious is Internet related crime in South Africa?", Hi Tech Security Solutions, [Online], , pp. 1 March 2013. Available from: http://www.securitysa.com/44245n. [1 March 2013]. Lemke, C., Coughlin, E., Garcia, L., Reifsneider, D., & Baas, J. (2009). Leadership for Web 2.0 in education:Promise and reality. Culver City, CA: Metiri Group. Mohapi, T. (2013), 8 January 2013 ∙‐last update, Cybercrime increase in South Africa forecasted for 2013. [Homepage of Humanipo], [Online]. Available: http://www.humanipo.com/news/3140/Cybercrime‐increase‐in‐South‐Africa‐ forecasted‐for‐2013 [2013, 4 March 2013]. SA facing increased cyber‐crime threats.2012, 12 Nov 2012‐last update [Homepage of IT News Africa], [Online]. Available: http://www.itnewsafrica.com/2012/11/sa‐facing‐increased‐cyber‐crime‐threats/ [2013, 20 January 2013]. Shipton, L. (2011), "Improving e‐safety in primary schools: a guidance document", [Online]. Available from: hallamunion.ac.uk/_assets/pdf/improving‐esafety‐in‐primary.pdf. South African cyber crime set to soar in 2013, 7 Jan 2013‐last update [Homepage of IT Web], [Online]. Available: http://www.itweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=60904 [2013, 5 March 2013]. Von Sohms, B. (2011), 6 June 2011‐last update, Cyber crime [Homepage of Leadershiponline], [Online]. Available: http://old.leadershiponline.co.za/articles/other/1356‐cyber‐crime [2013, 20 February 2013].

281

M‐learning With WhatsApp: A Conversation Analysis Abulela Ngaleka and Walter Uys Department of Information Systems, University of the Western Cape, Bellville, South Africa 2357748@uwc.ac.za wuys@uwc.ac.za Abstract: With the shortage of sufficient computer laboratories in previously disadvantaged Universities, mobile phones provide a platform that, if exploited correctly, could benefit both students and educators. This research paper focuses on the use of mobile phones as a platform to pursue collaborative research work amongst a group of third year undergraduate Information Systems students. The students used an application called WhatsApp to have group conversations about their research project. The text messages from these conversations were analysed using Conversation Analysis (Ten Have, 2007). The study shows how a group of students use Whatsapp to facilitate their work outside the classroom. The students primarily had conversations about meetings, discussed their project and also had conversations that were not related to their project. What was clear from the study was that there were significant differences between verbal conversations and conversations using mobile application. The findings also indicate significant collaboration and learning taking place outside the classroom without the influence of the lecturer, and calls for further research in order to understand the role of the lecturer in a m‐learning environment. Keywords: m‐learning, whatsapp, conversation analysis, collaborative learning

1. Introduction The use of mobile phones as a platform for mobile learning presents both students and lecturers with an opportunity for innovative pedagogy (Sharples, Taylor, & Vavoula, 2007). Mobile learning (m‐learning) is less restrictive than other forms of technology‐enabled learning, as students are able to participate in lessons and access material outside of class hours without having to be in the classroom or at the University (Laurillard, 2007). Most students either have a mobile phone, or has access to one (Beger & Sinha, 2012), and at this campus, students spend a significant amount of time with social networking on their smartphones, with limited use of phone calls or sms’s (Uys et al., 2012). With the use of mobile phones, students have a higher level of access to online resources than through fixed infrastructure, and have more flexibility in its usage, as they can communicate with their lecturers and other students in real time. Whereas mobile phones provide the technology for m‐learning, it is the smartphone applications and specifically the social networking and social media applications that provide the platform for students to interact with and learn with each other. These mobile social networking applications such as Facebook, Whatsapp, MXit, Blogs etc, offer an opportunity for extending learning beyond the classroom, and for learners and instructors to move beyond pre‐established categories of knowing (Wildner‐bassett, 2005). WhatsApp (“WhatsApp Messenger,” n.d.) is a free synchronous messaging application that can be used to send and receive instant messages between individuals and in groups (Ho, 2011). WhatsApp is a cross‐platform application that works mainly on smartphones and Android tablets unlike Blackberry ® Messenger (“Blackberry Messenger,” n.d.) which only works on the Blackberry OS. It is similar to MxIT mobile chat (“MXit Mobile Chat,” n.d.) which will also work on older phones. At the time of the survey, WhatsApp only allowed 10 members in a group, however this has subsequently been extended. This study specifically looks at how Whatsapp is used in a collaborative group research project at a previously disadvantaged University in South Africa.

2. M‐learning Mobile learning or m‐learning has different meanings across different contexts (Wikipedia, n.d.). Although related to e‐learning, it specifically focusses on learning across contexts using mobile devices. It specifically considers any sort of learning that happens when the learner is not at a fixed, pre‐determined location,

282

Abulela Ngaleka and Walter Uys through the use of mobile technologies (O’Malley et al., 2005). Mobile learning is however not an opportunity to replace classroom teaching but an additional learning aid that students can use to enhance their learning.

2.1 Opportunities for m‐learning M‐learning provides opportunities for learning that fixed or web‐based systems cannot (Peters, 2007). Communities that share the same goals have benefited from the establishment of the use of computer and web‐based mediated learning. The introduction of mobile phones means that there could be further development outside the classroom (Traxler & Leach, 2006). In addition, Attewell (2005) states that the use of mobile learning helps improve student skills and the application thereof. Hrastinski & Aghaee (2012) have outlined some ways that students are using social media for education, and highlights the use of Wikipedia, email and instant messaging as the main tools that students use to support their studies, yet have not been able to explain the mechanisms underlying such usage.

2.2 Challenges to m‐learning Traditionally, the use of mobile phones in the classroom has been seen as a disruption, as educators viewed them as distraction from what needed to be done (Burns & Lohenry, 2010; Tindell & Bohlander, 2012). “One user explained how ‘you can always tell’ when people are not engaged in their physical environment ‘because their heads are down and their thumbs are moving’” (Middleton & Cukier, 2006, p. 255) and the modern classroom is no different. In South Africa this has extended as far as to the banning of cellphones in schools (Ford & Batchelor, 2007). Due to this negative perception, some educators are loath to adopt mobile technology in the classroom. It is also technically not possible to switch off messaging from friends and family, so unless a dedicated social networking app is used only for classwork, and a way is found to disable other notifications from other apps, the widespread use of Apps such as WhatsApp and BBM in the classroom may find limited appeal. An example would be the use of MXit in maths and others in education (Butgereit, 2007; Chigona, Chigona, Ngqokelela, & Mpofu, 2009; Ford & Batchelor, 2007). Mobile phones however, give the students the possibility to learn beyond the classroom, and that in turn means that the educator can employ a student centred learning methodology. Learning does not only take place in the classroom, and in this way the student is at the centre of learning and the focus is on improving the quality of m‐learning (Sharples, Taylor, & Vavoula, 2005; Sharples et al., 2007).

3. Research problem The problem identified in this study is that, despite the clear benefits of social networking and mobile technologies for learning inside the classroom as well as its possible disruptive nature, (Hrastinski & Aghaee, 2012), educators are not yet clear on how m‐learning can be used outside the classroom, particularly if the learning is not directed by the educator. Furthermore, mobile communication can be conducted synchronously or asynchronously. According to (Schellens & Valcke, 2006) asynchronous discussion groups are helpful to build knowledge. In contrast to asynchronous discussions such as email or blogs, synchronous discussion groups allow students to have discussions in real time and do not have to wait until one of the group members can have access to a computer or email. It was also specifically the synchronous communication aspect of WhatsApp that we set out to explore. As it was realised in prior years in this course that students used BBM and Whatsapp informally to discuss and coordinate their tasks and activities without the awareness by the lecturer, it was decided to make it a specific requirement in this assignment. Initially we tried to understand how social networking applications such as Facebook and WhatsApp were used outside the classroom, in order to evaluate how this may complement classroom teaching activities. Due to the unlimited number of mobile applications and their uses, this study does not aim to provide an in‐ depth coverage of all possible application uses, but focuses on a specific aspect of sequence conversations by students using a social networking application called Whatsapp for their group assignment.

283

Abulela Ngaleka and Walter Uys

3.1 The empirical setting When a group of 3rd year Information Systems Research students were given a group research assignment, they were tasked to use the Whatsapp application for their group work. This gave us a rich source of data from 10 groups of approximately 5‐6 students each to evaluate. Some groups in this module and some students did not use whatsapp, however as there are no data to analyse from these groups, it is not possible to contrast the conversations of those who did not participate. From these conversations, we selected a group’s conversation to analyse who achieved the highest mark (99%) in their assignment, in order to try and understand what conversations that are occurring in the group, and how this could possibly aid an understanding of the complementary nature of m‐learning outside the classroom. The lecturer was initially not part of the messaging groups, and only joined at a later date. The group members Amelia, Andile, Angelique, Boni, Chikezi and Taureeq, (not their real names) mainly used the WhatsApp application in order to arrange meetings, make decisions and discuss their project. They also refer in their conversations to the Tutor, the Lecturer and to Prof, who is the HOD of the department. They also use the platform to have general conversation that do not relate to their project. There are long pauses in the conversation when the group meets physically. Although the students used the platform to discuss their project, there is still a need for them to meet physically to look at their research, as the application does not allow for the transmission of large data such as word documents. Another disadvantage of the system is that not all the group members had access to the application. This could be a result of many reasons such as the mobile phone not being compatible with the application, not having airtime, or having an outdated phone. The data is in the form of conversations that the students had using WhatsApp among themselves. The raw data comprises the extract from the group’s WhatsApp conversation, and is about 10,000 words and 950 message lines (numbered for reference purposes) written over a period of about 49 days.

4. Conversation analysis theory Laurillard (2002) posits that for learning to occur, there must be a conversation between the students and the teacher. Conversation analysis (CA) has been developed to evaluate conversations mediated by technology (King & Robinson, 2009) and is therefore an appropriate theoretical framework for analysing conversations mediated by mobile instant messaging such as WhatsApp. CA is a particular aspect of Discourse Analysis that can assist in determining occurrences within concepts which include describing phenomena and explaining it (Savenye & Robinson, 1996). Furthermore, conversation analysis focusses on the verbal and non‐verbal interaction between students and lecturers to improve students’ knowledge (Heinze & Procter, 2004). CA allows us to investigate how these conversations are aided by the use of Whatsapp, and determine what these conversations entail, and is therefore an appropriate theoretical framework for this study. This does not preclude the analysis of these conversations by using other forms of qualitative data analysis methodologies such as hermeneutics, semiotics, thematic analysis etc. however this is beyond the scope and focus of this particular paper. In addition, by using a specific theory to evaluate conversations it allows us to generalise from a particular case, as the empirical situation informs the relevant theory. The analysis will also assist in evaluating the research problem, and measure the effectiveness of mobile learning as a tool outside the classroom.

4.1 Four types of interaction conversation analysis The data was analysed using ten Have’s (2007) four types of interaction organisation conversation analyses. The four types are Turn‐taking organisation, Sequence organisation, Repair organisation and the organisation of turn‐design. Turn‐taking organisation occurs when the members of the group take turns during the conversation. One speaker makes a statement at a time and the rest of the group are listening to the message.

284

Abulela Ngaleka and Walter Uys Sequence organisation, can be explained as an utterance to a conversation that normally leads to a continuation of the subject being introduced. Repair organisation, occurs when an utterance has been made and the person can alter the statement to repair it to ensure that there is collective understanding (self‐repair or self‐ initiated). The repairing can also be instituted by the listener in the conversation (other‐initiated). The organisation of turn‐design entails the designing of utterances so that they fit their intended audience, in this case the group members (ten Have, 2007). The data was selected by using ten Haves’ sequences of conversation. The sequences that were not selected from the data could have yielded similar findings as the ones selected.

5. Conversation analysis The conversations analysed clearly indicate the four sequences by ten Have namely: The first sequence is the arranging of meetings, the second sequence was support on various aspects of the project, the third sequence on discussing the project and the fourth, about matters not related to the project. As there is no restriction of time and location with Whatsapp, the conversations in this analysis take place at any time of the day and night and the timestamp indicate the actual date and time. A line number stamp is used in order to be able to refer back to a particular message.

5.1 Turn‐taking organisation – arranging of meetings This section analyses the first sequence of conversations in the arranging of meetings. 001.5/13.19:17:Amelia: Ja when we goina meet other groups started already we only have 3weeks left...are we goina wait for the lecturer 002.5/13.19:20:Andile: Ja me 2 i was thnkn so... Lets meet soon 003.5/13@19:22:Amelia: How about 2moro? spoke 2 Boni she said she deleted her whatsapp 004.5/13@19:22:Angelique: Cant we meet 2moro morning likd at 10am. We cant start on anything yet coz we dont have the material we need. 005.5/13@19:24:Amelia: We can go ask 4 the scripts see if the Tutor finished marking them...do some research discuss what we feel is relevant then when we meet with Lecturer we will be prepared 006.5/13@19:24:Angelique: I sed that nw, lets meet 2moro at abt 10am, the earlier the better. 007.5/13@19:25:Amelia: Ja I agree

008.5/13@19:25:Angelique: Ok cool. 009.5/13@19:30:Andile: Y nt... Lets meet... Nw de q is wer 010.5/13@19:34:Amelia: Mayb a tut room coz study hall will be full 011.5/13@19:35:Andile: Ok sho... 012.5/13@19:35:Amelia: So 10 in ems building we can meet and look 4 a tut room 013.5/13@19:36:Angelique: Yes at 10am. 014.5/13@19:36:Andile: I dnt hav a prob wit dat 015.5/13@19:46:Taureeq: Ok I will be there too 016.5/13@19:39:Amelia: We need 2 inform Boni and that other guy 017.5/13@19:49:Andile: Nd i dnt even knw wer dey stay 018.5/13@19:45:Angelique: I dont have there numberz. 019.5/13@19:46:Amelia: I have Boni nt Chikezi can email him I'll sms Boni and email him

285

Abulela Ngaleka and Walter Uys What can be observed from the data is that the students do take turns in the conversations however; it does happen that the students make statements at the same time. This is due to the fact that they are not situated in the same location and they can respond without having to wait for the conversation initiator’s utterance. In this conversation, the students are arranging a meeting to work on their project. Multiple utterances are made to contribute to the conversation. Unlike in ten Haves’ Four types of interaction organisation the first step of interaction organisation, some of the utterances are made simultaneously as the application allows for different people to make statements at the same time. The speaker can be a receiver concurrently. For example, Andile replies to Amelia’s enquiry about the group meeting by agreeing that a meeting should take place soon. Angelique and Amelia simultaneously suggest that the meeting should take place the following day, of which the rest of the group members then the group reach consensus on the suggestion. When the group is discussing the venue for their meeting the pattern of simultaneous statement making occurs again. Amelia suggests a venue to the rest of the group and Angelique and Andile respond at the same time to agree with the suggestion. Another factor that can be observed from the data is that there are two group members that are not part of the conversation. These two group members will be informed of the decisions made by the group members who are using WhatsApp. This then means that the two are not part of the decision making but will rather be informed of decisions made.

5.2 Sequence organisation – support and multiple utterances In Sequence Organisation, parties’ utterances need to continue the subject that was introduced. The principles that are referred to in this section are (Klein & Myers, 1999) set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in Information Systems. Principle 2 is the Principle of Contextualisation, and Principle 6 is the Principle of multiple interpretations. Line 213.5/19@18:29:Taureeq:Angilique, maybe you can help me with principle 2 I've found a easy way to do this and its relevant and quoted from news articles Line 214.5/19@18:36:Angelique: U do prin2, i wil attempt another. The more done, the quicker we can get done and edit. Line 215.5/19@18:38:Taureeq: You see, then we can swap our work around for so that others can check it, and maybe add to our text Line 216.5/19@18:39:Angelique:Thats ryt. Line 217.5/19@18:40:Taureeq: I like this way, of doing group work, its so much faster, yet effective Line 218.5/19@18:43:Taureeq: I'm using that backward refernce technique,we learned in that literature review, that is the sh*t.... oh yes remember to hyperlink your reference to the website that way they can see its legit Line 219.5/19@18:47:Taureeq: Oh yes there is some questions from my side... I wanted to know if I can arrange a meeting with the Tutors, so that we can discuss the principles, just to make sure that we know what we are doing, and if we are on the right track, before its too late Line 220.5/19@19:12:Angelique: Im going to do principle 6. Line 221.5/19@19:13:Amelia: Ohk so ima email the lecturer and tell him we need 2 meet with the tutors or himself, we also need 2 have a talk with that prof from politics anything else? Line 222.5/19@19:13:Angelique: Im typing arial font 12. Line 223.5/19@19:14:Amelia: Ja I'm also typing in that font Line 224.5/19@19:20:Taureeq: Cool, I'd love to talk to that prof Line 225.5/19@22:15:Taureeq: How far did you guys get? Line 226.5/19@22:19:Angelique: Intro, meth and prin6. Line 227.5/19@22:19:Angelique:And nw im done.

286

Abulela Ngaleka and Walter Uys Line 228.5/19@22:20:Taureeq: Really, so you are working hard As can be seen from this conversation, it initially starts discussing “Principle 2”, however due to the nature of Whatsapp, being both synchronous and asynchronous, other conversations are being mixed up in this sequence of conversations, for example in line 218 a new topic was introduced i.e. backward referencing, in line 219 setting up a meeting with the Tutors, and in line 220 out of sequence a continuation of the previous conversation on Principle 6. This is followed by another change in conversation in line 222 where the student is stating the type of font that she is using. Due to the agnostic nature of Whatsapp messages, it does not provide a specific thread for readers to follow, and a number of concurrent conversations can be taking place simultaneously in any particular group, seemingly out of sequence, however to the participants who are following the conversations, it makes perfect sense.

5.3 Repair organisation – conversations about the project In the repair organisation, the speaker corrects his previous utterance, either induced by the speaker or the listener. The repairing can lead to the group having a similar understanding of the speakers’ utterance or there can be a need for further repairing. 001.5/16@14:04:Taureeq: Ok first type the principle of hermenuetic circle on word. Then take you batch of scripts and look under the headings principle of hermenuetic circle, and select all the facts out YouTube of that principle for each batch and make a long list of facts under that heading, the warrent must follow a intext reference(evidence). Then take note of the bibliography and cite the reference list of that Intext reference, or you can't do that afterwards.... so at the end of this you should have at least two pages of cited facts under that principle. Then if you done you can move on to the next principle and do the same thing 002.5/16@14:05:Taureeq: Sory about that, there is mistakes in the paragraph, my auto dictionary is messed up 003.5/16@14:08:Taureeq: If there is no Intext reference don't copy it down 004.5/16@14:09:Taureeq: So basically, we just going to jot down the Intext references with the fact that supports it In this conversation Taureeq is explaining the task to the other group members. He then realises that in his statement he had information that could be misunderstood by the receivers of the information. He then does what ten Have calls self‐initiated repairing where a speaker repairs their statement without the receiver initiating the repairing by offering a further explanation to his statement in line 002 and 003: In this instance Taureeq offers a correction to his previously made statement to make sure that the group members have a better understanding of his utterance. In other situations the repairing can be initiated by the listener. This can be done to ensure that the speakers’ utterance is clearly understood. The listener can repair a statement by seeking clarity. 001.5/22@19:34:Amelia: So me and Andile spoke 2 Lecturer we gt that prof email goina schedule a meeting with him and with regards to Chikezi Lecturer advised us to let him write his own lit review with regards 2 malema without it affecting our paper coz I read through Chikezi work that he sent and the quality of work not on the same standard as every1 elses so nw Angelique and toureeq I need ur guys ohk that Chikezi out the group before I email him nw 002.5/22@19:37:Angelique: His out of the group.Im fine with that. 003.5/22@19:39:Amelia: Ohk so we gt 4 ppl already so ima email him coz Lecturer agrees that it unfair that we must redo his work and he doesn't pitch up for meetings 004.5/22@19:40:Angelique: Its is unfair. 005.5/22@19:41:Amelia: Ja coz he unreliable so ja I'll email him nw to inform him 006.5/22@19:42:Amelia: Do you remember when we had the debate what 2 questions did we have 2 answer?

287

Abulela Ngaleka and Walter Uys 007.5/22@19:43:Angelique: No, i dont remember, y. 008.5/22@19:47:Amelia: Coz that what Chikezi must do 009.5/22@19:49:Angelique: Oh f*ck. serious dont remember. 010.5/22@19:54:Amelia:That fine 011.5/22@20:15:Andile: Daznt Taureeq remember anythng.... Nd dd u get ma email Amelia 012.5/22@20:16:Amelia: Yip I did thanx did he reply? 013.5/22@20:18:Andile: Dd he.... Wat dd he cy... I thot he was gona get it in de mrng 014.5/22@20:19:Amelia: No I'm asking if he replied lol 015.5/22@20:21:Angelique: My internet doesnt want 2work. 016.5/22@20:27:Andile: Shame @ Angelique.... Amelia nop i thnk he will in de mrng wen he gets 2 office 017.5/22@20:28:Amelia: Ohkey 018.5/22@20:58:Amelia: I emailed Chikezi nw so that's it his out 019.5/22@21:00:Andile: Lol i c 020.5/22@21:00:Angelique: Ok cool. Shame man, u doing al the dirty work. 021.5/22@21:01:Amelia: Ja the joys of being group leader 022.5/22@21:01:Andile: Lol 023.5/22@21:01:Angelique: Hahahaha. 024.5/22@21:35:Andile: Dd u guys du de reflection in 3rd person or what? 025.5/22@21:37:Angelique: Reflection is nt done in 3rd person, its abt u, what u did in the group. 026.5/22@21:37:Andile: Ok kul beans den 027.5/23@10:27:Amelia: So Chikezi jst replied to my email saying "I'll look 2 that thanx" lol weird 028.5/23@10:45:Angelique: His a idot. I used my gigs up 4the month. Im going crazy without internet. 029.5/23@11:30:Amelia: So the meeting confirmed with the lecturer 4 2moro 030.5/23@11:31:Amelia:At 10am In this conversation some of the students are having a discussion about an e‐mail that was sent to the lecturer because they needed to have a meeting about their project. Amelia is asking for feedback on the lecturers reply for a meeting to take place between the students and the lecturer. She gets a response which was not satisfactory and she asks again ‘No I'm asking if he replied lol’. This is what ten Have terms other‐initiated repairing, where the listener points out the inadequacies in the speakers answer. Andile responds by telling Amelia that he thinks the lecturer will reply to their e‐mail when he gets to the office in the morning. This repair was done to get a clear reply from the speaker.

5.4 Turn‐design organisation – conversations on other matters In the organisation of turn‐design step, the conversations are organised to fit in with the project that the students are working on. In some instances some of the group members have conversations that are inclusive of the entire team which then causes ‘tension’ within the group. As one can see in the conversation, the students are discussing an up and coming examination for one of their other modules that only three of the group members are writing. 001.6/1@10:50:Taureeq: 6 freaking marks to explain why we use critical path analysis, he said its coming in, and said we must look at 2nd year notes... man I'm just going to Google it 002.6/1@10:51:Amelia: Ja I have no idea where my notes are 003.6/1@10:53:Andile: M 2 bt ama luk 4 dem....

288

Abulela Ngaleka and Walter Uys 004.6/1@10:54:Taureeq: If you find, write down few pointers and send it over whatsapp, ill see what I can find 005.6/1@10:54:Angelique: How do u guys expect 2pass if u guys r texting al the time. 006.6/1@10:55:Taureeq: We learning 007.6/1@10:56:Angelique:And disturbing me. In this situation the three group members find the utterances appropriate as they can relate to them. However, one of the group members feels that their conversation is disturbing her as she cannot leave the group because their main task is not finished. This results in her having to be ‘present’ during the conversation even though it does not include her.

6. Key findings The conversation analysis of the data indicates that there are some differences between how ten Haves’ (2007) four types of interaction organisation conversation analyses occur, as opposed to the conversations conducted using mobile phones. What stands out from the data analysis is that students can be both the speaker and the listener concurrently, which means that different utterances can occur at the same time. Unlike with face to face conversations where one person speaks and everyone else waits for their turn to speak, everyone can speak simultaneously, and the messages are not lost within the conversation. This also leads to multiple threads of conversation, which the application does not keep track of, however order is maintained in the minds of the participants. In addition, using WhatsApp to have conversations can be a disadvantage because not all the students had access to the application. This meant that they were not part of the conversation even though they were part of the group. This also means that they were absent during meetings that took place using the application, so decisions that affected the entire group were made without the contributions of the absent members. Another aspect of using WhatsApp as a form of collaborative learning is that students can go back to previous utterances should the need arise. This is because the application records the conversations, and the students have access to the history of their conversations. This gives them an advantage as over verbal conversations as it is not always easy to remember everything that was mentioned, whereas with the application one can. Furthermore, the WhatsApp platform allows for students to form groups and they have conversation within these groups. Once a student has joined the group they can leave it whenever they choose. With the data, the students are involved in other subjects which they discuss within the group chat. What is prominent from the data is that not all the students are enrolled in one subject that the group is discussing which results in them having to be ‘part’ of the conversation, even though they do not part of that particular course discussion. In addition, it appears as if these conversations added to the formation of good working relations amongst this particular group of students as evident from how the different members divided up the workload and assisted each other (Line 213‐227 and the support that Taureeq was giving the group in line 228. The group did have some challenges with one of the members (Chikezi) as can be seen in lines 002‐027 under the section “Repair Organisation” and his lack of participation in the conversations. However the group managed to resolve these issues over the period of the assignment. Due to their excellent teamwork and final report, these students received 99% for their assignment. It was also found that although the use of mobile applications to enhance learning was effective in this case, not all the students in the group could participate in the out‐of‐the‐classroom academic discourse e.g. Boni did not have a cellphone capable of running WhatsApp. This was because they did not own smartphones or have sufficient airtime, which disadvantaged these individuals, the group and the learning process. To overcome this challenge it is recommended that the group work should be done using applications that run on most mobile phones, for example Mxit, however most students prefer the more modern WhatsApp or BBM. Another opportunity is that previously disadvantaged academic institutions fund students’ smartphones as part of their course fees, rather than students using their own devices which may not comply with the minimum requirements for the software.

289

Abulela Ngaleka and Walter Uys Limitations of this study are that it was conducted in a time‐limited format of a semester module, and a longitudinal study should be able to recover far richer data for analysis. Because the conversation that was analysed was from a highly effective group, possibilities exist to investigate the weaker groups conversations in order to ascertain whether the use of collaborative learning using mobile phones in such instances aid or detract from the process of learning. There are also nine other conversations from the other group which could be analysed in order to evaluate the types of conversations that the weaker groups had, however these conversations will not materially affect the findings made in this analyses, nor contribute any greater understanding as to the application of conversation analysis.

7. In conclusion This study has demonstrated one way of analysing WhatsApp conversations using Ten‐Haves (2007) Conversation Analysis. This does not preclude other studies from using one of the numerous other qualitative data analysis methodologies or theories. This paper focussed on analysing conversations that took place among students in a group work‐study formation. These conversations ranged from formal conversations such as arranging meetings and discussing their project as well as informal conversations such as partying, going to the gym and church. Even though ten Have’s four types of interaction organisation conversation analyses apply in this case, there are subtle differences between the way that electronic conversations developed amongst this group of participants, as opposed to one‐on‐one conversations for which the theory was developed. The use of WhatsApp also aided the formation of good working relations in the team, and assisted them in achieving a very high grade for their group assignment. This study has also indicated that collaborative learning was indeed supported by the use of mobile phones through the way that the students answered their own questions without the assistance of the lecturer. It is proposed that future studies examine the role of the lecturer in an m‐learning environment where significant learning occurs outside of the classroom such as the case with collaborative research projects.

Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the IFS352 class for their spirited participation in the group research projects, as well as specifically the team of Amelia, Andile, Angelique, Boni, Chikezi and Taureeq (you know who you are) for their brilliant effort in their research assignment. Also to Prof for allowing his lecturers the freedom to introduce their own unique style of teaching inside and outside the classroom. This research was conducted as part of the Mobile Technology for Education in Southern Africa (MTESA) research group. This study was conducted as part of Abu Ngaleke’s Honour’s thesis. Clearance was obtained from the Department concerned for the study, as well as permission from the participating students to use their Whatsapp conversations.

References Attewell, J. (2005). Mobile technologies and learning (pp. 1–25). Learning and Skills Development Agency, London. Beger, G., & Sinha, A. (2012). South African mobile generation Study on South African young people on mobiles (pp. 1–47). unicef. Blackberry Messenger. (n.d.). Retrieved May 31, 2011, from http://us.blackberry.com/blackberrymessenger/features.html Burns, S., & Lohenry, K. (2010). Cellular phone use in class: Implications for teaching and learning a pilot study. College Student Journal, 44(3), 805–810. Butgereit, L. (2007). Math on MXit : Using MXit as a Medium for Mathematics Education. Meraka INNOVATE Conference for Educators (p. 13). Chigona, W., Chigona, A., Ngqokelela, B., & Mpofu, S. (2009). MXIT : Uses , Perceptions and Self‐justifications. Journal of Information, Information Technology, and Organizations, 4. Ford, M., & Batchelor, J. (2007). From zero to hero – is the mobile phone a viable learning tool for Africa ? 3rd International Conference on Social and Organizational Informatics and Cybernetics (p. 7). Orlando, USA.

290

Abulela Ngaleka and Walter Uys Heinze, A., & Procter, C. C. (2004). Reflections On The Use Of Blended Learning. Retrieved February 24, 2013, from http://usir.salford.ac.uk/1658 Ho, W. S. Y. (2011). New Literacies and Popular Cultural Practices of University Students in Hong Kong. International Conference ICT for Language Learning (pp. 1–5). Hrastinski, S., & Aghaee, N. (2012). How are campus students using social media to support their studies? An explorative interview study ‐ ProQuest. Education and Information Technologies, 17(4), 451–464. King, S. O., & Robinson, C. L. (2009). Formative Teaching : A Conversational Framework for Evaluating the Impact of Response Technology on Student Experience , Engagement and Achievement. 39th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (pp. M2G1–M2G6). Klein, H. K., & Myers, M. D. (1999). A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating Interpretive Field Studies in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 23(1), 67. Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking Teaching for the Knowledge Society. EDUCAUSE review, 37(1), 16–27. Laurillard, D. (2007). Pedagogical forms for mobile learning : framing research questions. In: Pachler, N. (ed) (2007) Mobile learning: towards a research agenda. (pp. 153–175). London: WLE Centre, IoE. Middleton, C. a, & Cukier, W. (2006). Is mobile email functional or dysfunctional? Two perspectives on mobile email usage. European Journal of Information Systems, 15(3), 252–260. MXit Mobile Chat. (n.d.). Retrieved May 31, 2011, from http://www.mxit.com/content/device/en/download_mobile O’Malley, Vavoula, G., Glew, J. P., Taylor, J., Sharples, M., Lefrere, P., Lonsdale, P., et al. (2005). Guidelines for learning/teaching/tutoring in a mobile environment. MOBIlearn (pp. 1–57). Peters, K. (2007). m‐learning: Positioning educators for a mobile, connected future. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 8(2). Savenye, W. C., & Robinson, R. S. (1996). Qualitative Research Issues and Methods : An Introduction for Educational Technologists. Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 1045–1071). Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2006). Fostering knowledge construction in University students through asynchronous discussion groups. Computers & Education, 46(4), 349–370. Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2005). Towards a Theory of Mobile Learning. Proceedings of mLearn (pp. 1–9). Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2007). A Theory of Learning for the Mobile Age. In C. Andrews & R. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Elearning Research (pp. 221–247). London: Sage. Ten Have, P. (2007). Doing conversation analysis. SAGE Publications Limited. Tindell, D., & Bohlander, R. (2012). The use and abuse of cell phones and text messaging in the classroom: A survey of college students. College Teaching. Traxler, J., & Leach, J. (2006). Innovative and Sustainable Mobile Learning in Africa. Fourth IEEE International Workshop on Wireless, Mobile and Ubiquitous Technology in Education (WMTE’06) (pp. 98–102). Ieee. Uys, W., Mia, A., Jansen, G. J., Schyff, H. van der S., Josias, M. A., Khusu, M., Gierdien, M., et al. (2012). Smartphone Application Usage Amongst Students at a South African University. In P. Cunningham & M. Cunningham (Eds.), IST‐ Africa (pp. 1–11). Dar es Salaam: IIMC. WhatsApp Messenger. (n.d.). Retrieved May 31, 2011, from http://www.whatsapp.com/ Wikipedia, F. (n.d.). Educational assessment, 1–11. Wildner‐bassett, M. E. (2005). CMC as Written Conversation: A Critical Social‐constructivist View of Multiple Identities and Cultural Positioning in the L2/C2 Classroom. CALICO Journal, 22(3), 635–656.

291

Empowering Educators to Teach Using Emerging Technologies in Higher Education: A Case of Facilitating a Course Across Institutional Boundaries Dick Ng’ambi1, Vivienne Bozalek2 and Daniela Gachago3 1 University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa 2 University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa 3 Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape Town, South Africa dick.ngambi@uct.ac.za vbozalek@gmail.com gachagod@gmail.com Abstract: Although the use of emerging technologies is on the rise in Higher Education (HE) globally and South Africa in particular, it is seldom used in a way that facilitates transformative teaching and learning. One of the most common reasons why educators do not use emerging technologies to improve their teaching and learning practices is the lack of pedagogical knowledge. It is difficult to acquire pedagogical knowledge without being exposed to models of authentic pedagogical uses of emerging technologies. Accepting this view, four higher education institutions (HEIs) in South Africa convened a short course specifically targeted at educators on ‘Emerging Technologies for Improving Teaching and Learning’. A total of 43 participants attended the course over two years. The objective of the course was to empower educators from the four HEIs with pedagogical knowledge for teaching with emerging technologies. This paper draws on the theory‐based design framework for e‐learning to reflect on the two‐year inter‐institutional facilitation of a course aimed at empowering educators to teach with emerging technologies through modelling practice. The paper concludes that the course was largely successful in modelling good pedagogical practice for participants and that the process in collaborative design and delivery made for a rich experience for both participants and facilitators.

Keywords: emerging technologies, pedagogy, modelling practice, theory‐based design

1. Introduction There are fundamental challenges facing HE in general and South Africa in particular with respect to teaching with technologies (Bozalek, Ng’ambi & Gachago in press). The question as to why, despite emerging technologies increasingly becoming popular among both students and educators, pedagogical knowledge remains a barrier to effective uses of these technologies, is a concern many researchers in this field have raised (Burnapp 2011; Sharpe, Beetham & De Freitas 2010; Bonk 2001; Graham et al. 2000, Khoza 2011). Research has shown that unless sufficient support and training is given to educators regarding emerging technologies, uptake will remain on a superficial level, passive, teacher‐centred and didactic (Bertolo 2008; Herrington et al. 2010; Veletsianos 2011). While most institutions report commendable growth in staff development initiatives, e.g. workshops and seminars with a particular focus on use of technologies in teaching and learning, there has been little effect on changing the ways of pedagogical practice and in assisting educators to acquire the necessary knowledge and skills for their own practice (Sharpe, Beetham & De Freitas 2010). Demonstrations of educators’ innovative teaching practices involving technology are also scarce (Price & Kirkwood 2013). Our thesis is that modelling authentic pedagogical uses of emerging technologies in staff development programme is likely to influence pedagogical practices in a positive way. This paper aimed at exploring the extent to which participants of this programme were able to apply the practices we sought to model in their own teaching and how they perceived this particular approach to staff development. This paper is structured as follows: we first provide a background to the inter‐institutional pedagogical project we devised. The project was developed as an attempt to focus on a theory‐based design framework to promote active engagement with pedagogical practices rather than merely exposing academics to possible technological tools. We describe two iterations of the course, ‐ referred to as Case 1 and Case 2, which were implemented during 2011 and 2012. We describe the pedagogical models, learning strategies and corresponding tools that were used, and the participants’ responses to the course. The paper concludes with recommendations.

292

Dick Ng’ambi, Vivienne Bozalek and Daniela Gachago

2. Background The South African HE environment is confronted with systemic educational challenges. Among these are financial and infrastructural constraints that hinder technology adoption (Van Biljon & Dembskey 2011). However, the general historical backgrounds of South African HEIs is based on racial differentiation, and as a consequence has led to siloed approaches to addressing educational challenges thus hampering technology adoption. Inter‐institutional teaching (Ropp & Dickson1999) is an approach with the potential to limit the effects of racial differentiation and segmentation of teaching. Yusuf‐Khalil et al. (2007) report on the benefits of collaborating on an online course for students and academics across five countries. More recently, a pedagogical project across two differently placed HEIs in the Western Cape (Bozalek et al. 2010; Leibowitz et al. 2011; 2012) showed the powerful impact that inter‐institutional and cross‐disciplinary pedagogical projects can have on both students and educators. This influenced the motivation for the four institutions convening a single course for educators drawn from these institutions on the use of emerging technologies for improving teaching and learning. The four institutions were the University of Cape Town (UCT), the University of the Western Cape (UWC), Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT) and Stellenbosch University (SU), all situated in the Western Cape in South Africa.

3. Literature review 3.1 An inter‐institutional course as a disruptive practice One of the challenges facing HEIs is an ongoing spiral of increasing costs coupled with decreasing government funding and increased student resistance and incapacity to pay high tuition fees (Anderson & McGreal 2012). According to Anderson and McGreal (ibid), HEIs are under pressure to find innovative ways of using limited resources efficiently and effectively through exploring innovative ways of teaching to both widen access to education and to enhance students’ learning experience. However, the challenge lies in uplifting the quality of teaching as a practice across disciplines at institutions (The Learning Technologies Collaborative 2010). While individual institutions have implemented staff development strategies, these approaches are not usually packaged as a comprehensive unit delivered in a form of a course. The other aspect this project embarked on was to provide a way of understanding how systemic inequities in the South African HE sector influence use of technologies for teaching and learning. This paper reports on a course developed and delivered jointly by four HEIs aimed at enhancing the quality of teaching with emerging technologies at the participating institutions. This non‐credit earning course was offered for two years to two cohorts (2011 and 2012 cohort) and attended by 43 educators from participating institutions.

3.2 De‐emphasizing teaching, foregrounding learning One of the approaches used in the course was to encourage the creation of learning communities at participating institutions. Given that facilitators were from the four institutions, participants were assigned a ‘mentor’ based at their institutions whose role was to both provide support and to facilitate institutional‐ based collaboration. Dabbagh (2005) remarks that learning communities have potential to provide an environment that is both authentic and challenging, and has as its foremost advantage of de‐emphasizing teaching while foregrounding learning. By authentic learning we refer to the work of Jan Herrington and her colleagues who have identified nine elements of authentic learning, which deal with an ill‐defined authentic task which is scaffolded, has real world relevance and where multiple role models provide a number of different perspectives on the task at hand (Herrington et al. 2010). The pressures of HE in terms of limited teaching time, soaring cost of education, diverse levels of student preparedness, made it important to offer a programme that responds to some of these challenges and would be perceived as highly meaningful and easily adaptable to educators’ teaching environment. The level of filtering for relevancy of what participants were learning was therefore high. The course was inevitably structured on authentic activities that encouraged participants to focus on their own context, own students and teaching challenges, thereby making learning ‘meaningful and relevant to the learner’s interests and goals’ (Dabbagh 2005: p. 33). Saunders and Gale (2012) caution that ‘tools will only be used if they are perceived useful by students or if they are designed to form part of the students’ assessment’ (p. 856). To this end, we did both. Our goal was to make learning experiential and to give participants opportunities to practice alternative ways of teaching. A pre‐course survey was used to gain a sense of what tools were already familiar to participants and which ones they perceived to be useful and needed to learn about.

293

Dick Ng’ambi, Vivienne Bozalek and Daniela Gachago

3.3 Widening access through shared discipline or interest around tools An increasing number of scholars have confirmed the pedagogical value of social networking (Konert, Richter, Mehm, Göbel, Bruder, R., & Steinmetz, R. 2012; Rambe 2012). In their study on the role social networks play in learning environments with particular focus on how social networks are used for knowledge sharing and students’ support, Cadima, Ojeda, and Monguet (2012) observe that there was a ‘significant association between closeness, centrality and performance’ (p. 301). Put simply, the concepts of closeness, centrality and performance mean that the higher the number of contacts an individual has, and that the shorter the distance from one individual to all the other individuals in the community, the better his/her performance becomes. We inferred from this that bringing educators from institutions located in close proximity would leverage institutional staff development initiatives and enhance the teaching performance. We reduced the ratio of facilitator to participant by ensuring that at least two facilitators from each HEI (in total eight facilitators) were available to coach and scaffold approximately 22 participants per cohort. This also meant that there was a wide range of expertise available regardless of what institution one came from. Our assumption was that educators would widen access to counter‐parts based on either shared discipline or interest around tools. In additional to the physical proximity that we provided to participants, we made extensive use of social media applications, to allow ongoing communication and community building among participants beyond the face‐ to‐face meetings.

3.4 De‐emphasizing tools and emphasizing practice From the onset, the facilitators took a deliberate decision to make the technologies ‘invisible’, but rather placed emphasis on pedagogically innovative practices. Tambouris, Panopoulou, Tarabanis, Ryberg, Buus, Peristeras, Lee, and Porwol (2012) distinguish between technologies such as blogs, podcasts and wikis from practices of blogging, podcasting, and writing collaboratively. Thus, according to Tambouris et al. (ibid) teachers can still use Web 2.0 tools in a teacher‐centred way, for example a teacher may create a blog to disseminate information to learners without allowing learners to comment. One of the objectives of the course was to model ways of teaching with emerging technologies in ways that de‐emphasize tools and emphasize innovative practices in learner‐centred approaches. We were mindful of the fact that realizing this learning outcome was difficult, given the educator’s and institutional cultures as Tambouris et al. (2012: p. 240) rightly observe, ‘adopting Web 2.0 learning includes more or less radical changes in the relations between learners and teachers in terms of power and control over the learning processes and environments. Thus, new tensions and challenges arise.’ Bozalek et al. (2010) caution also that cross‐institutional projects need to be supported on a policy and institutional level to make them sustainable.

4. Theory‐based design framework for emerging technologies In choosing a theoretical framework, we were mindful that in whatever we did in the course either consciously or unconsciously we should aim to model transformative practice to participants. To this end, we drew substantially from Dabbagh’s (2005) conceptualization of the theory‐based design framework as it captured well our teaching approach which was to foreground learning, widen access to shared disciplinary knowledge and emphasize practice over tools. Ng'ambi and Lombe (2012) provide a useful example of the difference between a tool and practice, ‘…some of the educational benefits accrued from using podcasts include facilitating the meaning making process, directing learning through facilitating question formulation, facilitating critical engagement with content and effective communication of ideas through students’ reflection on peer’s podcasts.’ (p.190). We therefore agree with Dabbagh (2005) that meaningful learning and interaction involve three interrelated iterative components: the pedagogical models (for example, modelling teaching with emerging technologies through knowledge building communities), the learning strategies (i.e. focus on the practice of blogging, podcasting, and writing collaboratively as opposed to merely creating an awareness of tools), and pedagogical tools (i.e. demonstrating affordances of technologies such as blogs, podcasts and wikis). Dabbagh (ibid) contends that the increasing availability of technologies is creating new possibilities of using these technologies, and as a consequence new pedagogical practices and social practices are continuously being transformed. We inferred from Dabbagh that there might have been participants on the course who were aware of new pedagogical and social practices shaped by use of emerging technologies that may have exceeded the facilitators’ knowledge of these practices. In other words we wanted to flatten the hierarchical structure between facilitators and participants by seeing knowledge as co‐constructed. Accepting this view, our goal was to create a conducive learning space where participants could be free to share ideas as more knowledgeable others with peers and facilitators. This being a practice‐based course,

294

Dick Ng’ambi, Vivienne Bozalek and Daniela Gachago participants were encouraged to focus on their own practice which included their respective disciplines, their students’ learning needs, and teaching challenges sandwiched between students; learning needs and curricula. This is consistent with authentic learning activities, which ‘engage the learner in a realistic and meaningful task that is relevant to the learner’s interests and goals’ (Dabbagh 2005: p. 33).

5. Case study method The course was conceptualised in 2009 as part of the Cape Higher Education Consortium's (CHEC) initiative to design and develop short teaching and learning courses targeted at educators from the four HEIs in the Western Cape. Teaching and learning specialists from the four institutions designed the course collaboratively. There were two iterations of the course, hereafter described as Case 1 (2011: 22 participants) and Case 2 (2012: 21 participants) below. The main improvements based on participants’ feedback and course facilitators’ reflections gathered after the first course implementation were:

Instead of focusing on institutional technologies, such as Learning Management Systems (LMSs), which were not equally available at all four participating institutions, we structured Case 2 around emerging technologies, which are freely accessible to everyone.

Participants complained about unclear course information, instructions and guidance in Case 1 and for Case 2 the course outline was rewritten, streamlined and facilitators aimed to give as coordinated feedback as possible.

Through the use of emerging technologies, such as Facebook groups and Instant Messaging tools, communication was improved and participants experienced 24/7 support. We also tried to reduce feedback times on e.g. weekly blog reflections.

In Case 2 we also ensured that presentation time was kept to a minimum to allow for extended discussion and interactive engagement from participants.

Assignments were streamlined and were all structured to support the work on the prototype, the main unit of assessment, which started from the first workshop.

We explored a number of emerging technologies and tools in this course. Both the introduction and use of the tools were driven by pedagogical practice as opposed to merely focusing on the tool. This was consistent with the theory‐based design approach adopted in the course. It was envisaged that our adherence to the three interrelated iterative components of the theory (i.e. the pedagogical models, the learning strategies and pedagogical tools) would provide an effective modelling approach for teaching with emerging technologies (See Table 1). Table 1: The use of emerging technologies tools based on the theory‐design framework

Learning strategy

Pedagogical tool

Modelling authentic pedagogical uses of emerging technologies

information sharing, collaboration, communication and formal reflection

Blog www.checet.blogspot.com

facilitation of informal communication, community building, discussions, informal reflection and sharing of information

Facebook group www.facebook.com/groups/chec et2012

facilitation of group discussions or simple mailing lists

Google newsgroups checet‐ practitioners@googlegroups.com

sharing of documents and collaboratively working on documents online, collection of online feedback

Google docs http://docs.google.com

communicating and chatting online with a group of people, for sharing applications and documents and recording meetings; formative feedback on assignments

Adobe connect http://meeting.uct.ac.za/checet/

295

Dick Ng’ambi, Vivienne Bozalek and Daniela Gachago

Learning strategy

Pedagogical tool

audio recording and sharing recording with a commenting functionality

Soundcloud www.soundcloud.com

online collaboration to improve an existing repository of emerging technologies

Wikispaces http://checit.wikispaces.com

following people in a field of research and access invaluable pointers to current articles, blog posts, videos, conferences or just peoples' opinion on their field of expertise, back channel for participants feedback during face to face presentations

Twitter www.twitter.com, hashtag #checet

creation and sharing online tutorials for various Vodcasts and Screencasts created tools with Camstudio and shared on Facebook group and blog

Data were collected from course surveys and reflective blog posts from participants of both cohorts and analysed deductively based on constructs identified in the theory‐based design framework. Participants gave informed consent and ethical clearance was sought from one of the participating institution to conduct the study.

6. Analysis of results In the following section we present examples of how participants responded to our modelling of authentic pedagogical practice approach and then discuss participants’ learning experience based on their feedback and reflection.

6.1 Effect of modelling authentic pedagogical practices on participants In one of the questions of the post‐course survey, participants were asked to comment on how they planned to use what they had learnt in course and how they envisaged such use would improve the quality of their students' learning. The following extracts show how selected participants linked the technology that they found most useful to an effective teaching and learning practice for their specific context. These extracts exemplify how these participants took up our attempts to model best practice. Extract 1: I will use the Wikispaces site that I have created as well as vodcasts or screencasts. I think that it will increase student engagement with the course content and enhance their core skills‐ academic literacy, computer literacy and time management. Pedagogical model

Learning Strategy

Pedagogical tool

Student engagement, Academic literacy, Computer literacy and Time management.

Participative creation of course content

wikis, vodcasts or screencasts

Extract 2: I could already see the improved conceptualisation of the logic of research methodology when I have used concept map the past two weeks and students could now understand even quicker than the different groups that I have gathered data from over the past four years of teaching it. Pedagogical model

Learning Strategy

Pedagogical tool

Improved understanding and conceptualisation of content

Create additional study resources

Screencasts and Concept Maps.

296

Dick Ng’ambi, Vivienne Bozalek and Daniela Gachago Extract 3: I will continue to investigate the efficacy of using Facebook. My main focus at the moment is to improve communication between the students and I, and also to use it as an informal method of supporting my students in the upcoming exams. Students are also seeing the value of using this medium. Pedagogical model

Learning Strategy

Pedagogical tool

Enhance informal communication and support among educators and students

Creating a closed Facebook group for communication and support

Social networking

Extract 4: Blogging: facilitates a much deeper and broader engagement with my students, will help me lure them into thinking more deeply about theory in relation to daily life, to make connections between topical events and the classroom. Pedagogical model

Learning Strategy

Pedagogical tool

Improve reflection, connection between academic and social content

Reflection and discussions on blogs

Blogs

Extract 5: I will be using the prototype I've designed (Wiki). I envisage that this will increase student engagement, enhance collaboration, and improve digital literacy. Pedagogical model

Learning Strategy

Pedagogical tool

Increase student engagement Enhance collaboration Improve digital literacy

Collaborative writing

Wiki

Extract 6: Poll Everywhere ‐ quick quizzes in class to increase attention span and make lectures more active. Anonymous use encourages shy/unconfident students. Online quizzes ‐ although I'm going to bombard our management with suggestions to make the tool more user‐friendly. Pedagogical model

Learning Strategy

Pedagogical tool

Increase attention span Self‐assessment Feedback

Immediate feedback to students and educators, providing back channel, self‐assessment

Poll Everywhere, online quizzes

6.2 Evaluation of participants’ learning experience In evaluating participants’ learning experience, we asked them how they experienced the teaching approach used to scaffold their learning in the course and the extent to which the course focused on practice over technological tools. One of our main objectives for this pedagogical project was to de‐emphasize tools; to make them ‘invisible’ and ensure participants remained engaged with the task at hand. This is well captured in the following comment: For me it was a firsthand experience using a network‐communication environment. I found it greatly engaging and there were so many valuable comments made online that really helped to shape my assignment ... which, I believe would not all have been forthcoming in a face‐to‐face session. I think it is really about there being a very different vibe when online ... if that makes

297

Dick Ng’ambi, Vivienne Bozalek and Daniela Gachago sense ... it was exciting, new and I felt far less restricted to give comments ... strange, because I'm by no means a shy person ... it almost allows you to change your persona ... While not mentioning the tool, the participant emphasizes the benefit of the specific practice which offered opportunities for open feedback and dialogue. Given this positive experience, it can be inferred that the participant is more likely to want to create a similar learning experience for his/her students (Herrington et al 2010). The use of the theory‐based design model allowed participants to step‐back, think about their own practice and this resulted in deep reflective learning. I had never really spent so much time reflecting on my teaching and what I'm doing in the lecture room. It was a great and sometimes a sobering experience. I just did not find the blogs too helpful to write the assignment. The above statement also shows that participant saw the need to ensure a tight alignment between the pedagogical tool such as blogs, learning strategy of writing an assignment, and the pedagogical model. Implied in ‘…I just did not find the blogs too helpful to write the assignment...’ is that the pedagogical model could not be achieved by use of the said learning strategy and chosen tool. The use of the theory‐based design model for designing the entire course also forced facilitators to carefully think about cohesion of the course and its logical sequence of delivery as noted: I loved how you guys designed the structure of the entire course ... how each exercise led to next and eventually each exercise combining into a finished tool combined with a thought out assignment ... excellent. Although I did not notice this on the first day ... it eventually was like a little adventure ride :) The participant’s experience is consistent with Dabbagh’s (2005) claim about meaningful learning as involving three interrelated iterative components: the pedagogical models, the learning strategies and pedagogical tools, and these require to be knitted such that the learner gains a seamless experience. Notwithstanding the positive outcome of the course, some frustrations were also noted, in particular with the theoretical underpinning of the course. One participant reported, for example on what he/she believed were misplaced assumptions that facilitators had about participants’ appreciation and interest in the concept of pedagogy. I did not like the focus on the first day on pedagogy and the use of jargon. While I do like the focus on the best use of a tool for learning rather than the learning, not having previously been exposed to pedagogy (despite 15 years of teaching) I found this put me off a lot. There seemed to be an assumption we knew what this was and what the principles were, etc. One of the comments that best summed up the experiences of participants, which were highly enthusiastic regarding the course, was captured here: ‘Hard to believe this course is over. Relief (it's been HARD work) and really sad (it has been EXCELLENT, so many new ideas, people). Wondering what happens now...’

7. Conclusion and recommendations The paper reported on a two‐year study of facilitating an inter‐institutional course aimed at empowering educators to teach with emerging technologies. The objective of the course was to facilitate and model a possible best practice for teaching and learning with emerging technologies. The primary premise of the course was to model authentic pedagogical uses of emerging technologies and therefore the course itself served as an example of pedagogical design. The facilitators were teaching and learning experts drawn from the target institutions were participants worked. The course provided a unique opportunity for academics to come together in a relaxed and supportive atmosphere to learn, discuss and benefit from valuable experiences of peers and expert facilitators from the four HEIs in our region regarding the use of technologies for improved teaching and learning. The paper discussed how Dabbagh’s (2005) conception of meaningful learning and interaction that involves three interrelated iterative components (i.e. the pedagogical models, the learning strategies and pedagogical tools) was implemented in the design of the course, and taken up by participants in how they hoped to teach with emerging technologies. Findings showed that participants may have learnt how to emphasize learning practices rather than technological tools. This was evidenced in their final presentations where they had to

298

Dick Ng’ambi, Vivienne Bozalek and Daniela Gachago provide a theoretical argument for their pedagogical model, their learning strategies and the tools they adopted to achieve this, evaluating the whole process. Their evaluations of the course also showed that they acquired a more nuanced understanding and engagement with the way technologies and practices are interlinked. However, some participants’ responses also indicated that the focus on pedagogy, if not made accessible, can feel foreign and alienate educators who are not exposed to this discourse in their daily work. Participants embraced the move from institutional technologies such as LMSs, to emerging, mainly cloud‐ based, technologies, which allowed for more immediate informal communication and support and facilitated community building across institutional boundaries. One of the key lessons things we have learnt from this experience is the need to have a dedicated facilitator to respond quickly to queries, upload materials and comment on student submissions. Furthermore, negotiating the curriculum design and collaborating with colleagues from four HEIs is a time intensive process. It took many meetings and months of intensive discussion to reach consensus about what should be included in the course, how the course should be delivered and the best way forward on the most appropriate pedagogical strategies. It is perhaps to be expected that possible intellectual tensions could develop, considering there were eight academics from different contexts coming together to co‐construct a course for the first time. It is thus important to stay mindful of the goal of fostering collegiality and expanding a knowledge sharing community. Further research is needed to explore inter‐institutional collaboration to deliver effective pedagogical endeavours, which are conducted across the boundaries of institution and discipline.

Acknowledgments We would like to thank all the participants from the four institutions (i.e. University of Cape Town, the University of the Western Cape, Cape Peninsula University of Technology and Stellenbosch University) and facilitators for all their valuable contribution and for making this course successful. We are also indebted to CHEC for sponsoring this course. Disclaimer: All the views expressed in this paper are of the authors and do not represent the views of CHEC.

References Anderson, T. and McGreal, R. (2012) ‘Disruptive Pedagogies and Technologies in Universities’. Educational Technology & Society, Vol. 15, No.4, pp 380–389. Bertolo, E. (2008) Web 2.0: ‘Unlearned Lessons from Previous Virtual Learning Environments’, [online], Bioscience Education ejournal, Vol. 11(June) www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/journal/vol11/beej‐11‐7.pdf Bonk,C. (2001) Online teaching in an online world. Bloomington, IN:CourseShare.com. Bozalek, V., Carolissen, R., Nicolls, L., Leibowitz, B., Swartz, L. and Rohleder, P. (2010) ‘Engaging with Difference in Higher Education Through Collaborative Inter‐Institutional Pedagogical Practices’. South African Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 24, No. 6: pp 1023‐1037. Bozalek, V., Ng’ambi, D. and Gachago, D. (in press) ‘Transforming teaching with emerging technologies: Implications for Higher Education Institutions’, South African Journal of Higher Education. Burnapp, D. (2011) ‘Developments in information and communications technology (ICT) and the growth of E‐learning’. In: Burnapp, D. et al. The strategic implications of different forms of international collaboration in Higher Education. Northampton: The University of Northampton. Cadima, R., Ojeda, J., and Monguet, J. M. (2012) ‘Social Networks and Performance in Distributed Learning Communities’. Educational Technology & Society, Vol. 15, No.4,pp 296–304. Dabbagh, N. (2005) ‘Pedagogical models for E‐Learning: A theory‐based design framework’. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, Vol. 1, No.1, pp 25‐44. Graham, C.K., Cagiltay,J., Craner, B.L., and Duffy,T.M. (2000) Teaching in a web‐based distance environment: An evaluation summary based on four courses. Bloomington: WW Wright Education (CRLT Technical Report No.13‐00). Herrington, J., Reeves, T. C. and Oliver, R. (2010) A guide to authentic e‐learning. New York & London: Routledge. Konert, J., Richter, K., Mehm, F., Göbel, S., Bruder, R., and Steinmetz, R. (2012) ‘PEDALE ‐ A Peer Education Diagnostic and Learning Environment’. Educational Technology & Society, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp 27–38. Khoza, S.B. (2011) ‘Who promotes web‐based teaching and learning in higher education?’ Progressio, Vol. 33, No. 1: pp155‐170. Leibowitz, B., Bozalek, V., Carolissen, R., Nicholls, L., Rohleder, P., Smolders, T., and Swartz, L. (2011) ‘Learning together: Lessons from a collaborative curriculum design project’. [online, Special issue on Content and Language Integrated Learning] Across the Disciplines, Vol. 8, No. 3. http://wac.colostate.edu/atd/clil/leibowitzetal.cfm Leibowitz,B., Swartz, L., Bozalek,V., Carolissen, R., Nicholls. L. and Rohleder, P. (eds.) (2012) Community, Self and Identity: Educating South African Students for Citizenship. Cape Town: HSRC Press.

299

Dick Ng’ambi, Vivienne Bozalek and Daniela Gachago Leppisaari, I., Herrington, J., Vainio, L. and Im, Y. (2013) ‘Authentic e‐Learning in a Multicultural Context: Virtual Benchmarking Cases from Five Countries’. [online], Journal of Interactive Learning Research, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 53‐73. Chesapeake, VA: AACE. http://www.editlib.org/p/38488. Ng'ambi, D., and Lombe, A. (2012) ‘Using Podcasting to Facilitate Student Learning: A Constructivist Perspective’. Educational Technology & Society, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp 181–192. Price ,L. and Kirkwood, A.(2013) ‘Using technology for teaching in higher education: a critical review of the role of evidence in informing practice’. Higher Education Research and Development (in press). Ropp, M.M., and Dickson, W.P. (1999) Solutions to Teaching Educational Technology Courses: A Case of Cross‐Institutional Team Teaching. In J. Price et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 1999, pp 403‐407. Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Saunders, C. F. and Gale, W. A. (2012) ‘Digital or didactic: Using learning technology to confront the challenge of large cohort teaching’. British Journal of Educational Technology. Vol. 43, No. 6, pp 847–858. Sharpe, R., Beetham, H., & de Freitas, S. (Eds.) (2010) Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences. London: Routledge. Tambouris, E., Panopoulou, E., Tarabanis, K., Ryberg, T., Buus, L., Peristeras, V., Lee, D., and Porwol, L. (2012) ‘Enabling Problem Based Learning through Web 2.0 Technologies: PBL 2.0’. Educational Technology & Society, Vol, 15, No. 4, pp 238–251. The Learning Technologies Collaborative (2010) ’Emerging: A Re‐Conceptualization of Contemporary Technology Design and Integration’. In G. Veletsianos (e.d) ) Emerging Technologies in Distance Education. Theory and Practice. Edmonton: AU Press, pp 91‐108. Van Biljon.J., and Dembskey, E. (2011) Learning tools in resource constrained environments:Learning from e‐learning in the time of m‐learning. Paper presented at the IDIA Conference, 26 October, 2011, Lima , Peru. Veletsianos, G. (2011) ‘Designing Opportunities for Transformation with Emerging Technologies’.Educational Technology, Vol. 51, No. 2, pp 41‐4. Yusuf‐Khalil, Y., Bozalek, V., Staking, K., Tuval‐Mashiach, R. and Bantebya‐Kyomuhendo, G. (2007) ‘Reflections on a Collaborative Experience: Using ICT in a Transcultural Women’s Health Module’, Agenda, No. 71, pp54‐65.

300

Explaining Influences in the Adoption of Blackboard at an Institution of Higher Learning Vuyisile Nkonki, Siyanda Ntlabathi and Luvuyo Mkonqo University of Fort Hare, Alice, South Africa vnkonki@ufh.ac.za sntlabathi@ufh.ac.za lmkonqo@ufh.ac.za Abstract: The study sought to understand and explain factors that influence individual lecturers’ possibility to adopt Blackboard, a Learning Management System (LMS) at an institution of higher learning. Rogers’ (1995) diffusion of innovation theory is used as a framework for the explanation of these factors. The study starts by looking at different theoretical frameworks, namely: positivist, interpretive, and the critical perspectives. The underlying assumptions and the teaching and learning practices reinforced and perpetuated by these perspectives are discussed, followed by the views of these perspectives on LMSs and e‐learning. Thereafter, Snelbecker’s (1999) model of CMS adoption is described and critiqued in relation to Blackboard adoption. This research offers the Rogers’ diffusion of innovation theory (1995) as an alternative to explain the soaring numbers in the uptake of Blackboard in an institution of higher learning. This theory is also used to look at influences in the adoption of the Blackboard LMS, and the epistemological and pedagogical leanings of these influences. The data for this research was collected from different lecturers across Faculties and Departments through a pre‐structured survey questionnaire. The criteria for inclusion into the sample were first hand experiences with Blackboard. Lecturers’ narratives were analysed, and themes were extracted and slotted into the analytic categories suggested by Rogers (1995), namely: relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability. The results are then discussed in relation to the findings of other research on the adoption of Blackboard and other LMSs. Implications for improvement and further development of Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) and further research are drawn. Keywords: learning management system, blackboard, adoption, innovation, diffusion, theoretical perspectives

1. Introduction The Academic Development Centre of an institution of higher education identified Blackboard as a LMS (Learning Management System) to be used by the institution in 2008. The Blackboard server and other equipment required to run blackboard were installed in one of the campuses. In 2009, the eLearning consultants attended an initial Blackboard training which prepared them to assist and support the academics that were going to participate in the TeL (Technology Enhanced Learning) pilot program hosted by the eLearning division in the centre. Training for the eLearning consultants and ICT staff members also took place to ensure appropriate technology and administrative support. Academics who wanted to make use of Blackboard for their courses had to contact the eLearning consultants in the centre for proper support and guidance. All Blackboard users attended a Blackboard orientation workshop. An on‐going support for the blackboard users was offered via face‐to face consultations and email for students. The table below shows the number of students, lecturers and courses that took up Blackboard. Table 1: TeL report (2012)

2009

2010

2011

2012

Students

607

988

4355

6555

Instructors

103

154

Courses

192

The figures above suggest a positive response by lecturers in their adoption of Blackboard as a Learning Management System (LMS). This research sought to explain factors that explain the soaring of numbers in the uptake of Blackboard in this particular institution, and the associated benefits. Research on the adoption of various LMSs has been conducted in South Africa using a variety of theories and models. For example, Mafuna and Wadesango (2012) considered the Critical Success Factors (CSF) for e‐learning acceptance, particularly Wiseup a customised Blackboard LMS. Mlitwa and van Belle (2010) considered the structuration theory, Actor Network Theory (ANT), and then applied the activity theory as a lens to research the adoption of LMSs in universities. Venter, van Rensburg, and Davis (2012) looked at the determinants of LMS usage using the extended Technology Acceptance Model (TAM).

301

Vuyisile Nkonki, Siyanda Ntlabathi and Luvuyo Mkonqo The increase in popularity of LMSs is noted by Malikowski, Thompson, and Theis (2007:170). Their research used the Snelbecker’s model to categorise the features used, and explain the sequence in which lecturers adopt an LMS. The following are the categories in the model (1) transmitting course contents, (2) assessing student learning, (3) evaluating courses and teaching, (4) creating class discussions, and (5) creating computer based instruction. The levels of usage of LMS are typified as, level 1: most used; level 2: moderately used; and level 3: rarely used. Research on LMS adoption involving 2059 lecturers in 43 North American institutions revealed that the transmission of content fell in level 1, followed by assessing students and creating class discussions falling in level 2, whereas evaluating courses and teaching, and computer based instruction fell in category 3. The model categorises LMS feature usage, and explains the progression in the adoption of an LMS. However, it does not explain how the LMS is experienced by the users, and whether those experiences have a bearing on the adoption and scaling up of LMS usage. Rogers (1995) offers a framework for the explanation of the factors that influence the adoption of an innovation from the vintage point of those who have firsthand experience of the innovation.

2. Literature review 2.1 Theoretical frameworks on the adoption on e‐learning In order to frame and focus the research three epistemological frameworks on e‐learning models and their views on teaching and learning are discussed, namely: positivist, interactionist, and critical perspectives The positivist perspective holds the view that education is primarily a transmission. It views the student as a container who must acquire knowledge. Thus, LMSs are viewed as but one channel of acquiring knowledge. Fallery and Rodhain (2011) argue that for e‐Learning, the behaviourist view of transmission produces a systematic enhancement of the access and channelling or delivery of content. Like other behaviourist teaching models, the authors argue that the positivists focus on managing and transmitting lessons, and PowerPoint slides. They add that eLearning platforms are efficient forms of communicating sessions, messages, calendar dates, quizzes, and sharable resources such as course guides and learning guides. The tools or functionaries are however criticised for being static, allowing lecturers to transmit information to students, and for promoting technology enhanced traditional teaching and learning practices (Malikowski, et al, 2007). The folders, modules, task bars, organised activities and instructional units which are sequenced, and categories of tools in Blackboard are evidence of the instructional design features of behaviourist models which place emphasis on task analysis (Mayers and de Freitas, 2004). The interpretive perspective focuses on the cognitive processes which enable exchange, participation, drawing of connections and construction of knowledge. According to Fallery and Rodhain (2011) the interpretive is interested on the learner to learner, learner to content, and learners to instructor interactions. It looks at how these LMSs and technologies are perceived and experienced by students and the lecturers in terms of providing feedback, interaction, and exchange. This perspective resonates well with the cognitive perspective of learning which according to Mayers and de Freitas (2004) stress the development of autonomous learners, conceptual development, and help students learn how to learn. This perspective aligns with conversational models of learning and designs that are characterised by interactive environments for creating understanding, and teaching and learning activities that encourage experimentation and discovery, ownership of the task, guided discovery and scaffolding. Thus, when LMSs are evaluated against this perspective, they are judged on their ability to foster intearctions and self regulation of the part of students. Lecturers on the other hand are evaluated on the strategic use of LMSs to foster interaction and self regulation. According to Mayers and de Freitas (2004) the critical perspective aligns with the situative learning perspective which emphasises dialogue that facilitates the development of learning relationships, and the development of identities, social practices of enquiry and learning, disciplinary practices, collaborative learning outcomes and authentic practices. Selwyn (2007) argues that the critical perspective seeks to explain the restrictive and non‐ transformatory nature of formal use of technology in contemporary higher education, and the relations of power inherent in the system. According to Fallery and Rodhain (2011) this perspective focuses on the negotiation of meaning, social creation of knowledge and the building of knowledge through work. He observes that many students and Faculty make limited use technology during their teaching and learning. He notes the inconsistencies and variabilities, and laments about students and Faculty’s reluctance to engage with technologies meant to enhance teaching and learning. Blin and Munroe (2007) adopted the activity theory to

302

Vuyisile Nkonki, Siyanda Ntlabathi and Luvuyo Mkonqo study transformations or alterations in the structure of teaching and learning arising from the deployment of e‐learning technologies, particularly Moodle. These authors conclude that the LMS is mainly used for administration, dissemination of resources, and to complement or replicate existing practices. In a similar vein Hanley (2011), in his study of the use of computer technology in university teaching and learning, concludes that LMSs perpetuate the very traditional pedagogy they seek to replace. He laments that LMSs are more on instructional pedagogies rather than constructivist pedagogies, and that students have low levels of access, control and contribution to their own education. The criticism of LMSs in Yasar and Adiguzel (2010) suggest that self regulated learning is limited due to fact that students are restricted to specified activities, for limited time, and have no control on the parts and the conditions of their own learning. They also point out that traditional LMSs restrict teachers to design more student centred courses and activities with dynamic content navigation. In view of the above perspectives the findings of various researches on LMSs show teaching and learning approaches promoted by the LMSs. Lonn and Teasley (2009) explored uses and perceived benefits of using an LMS to support classroom teaching. Their findings suggest that both lecturers and students agreed that LMSs are valuable for efficient communication. However, students were less positive about the effects on instructor teaching. The study by Christie and Garrote (2011) suggests that Blackboard usage for most lecturers is limited to tasks that are less time consuming and intellectually demanding. Another revelation of this study was failure to use LMSs more pedagogically, and the observed quantitative rather than qualitative usage. Kinash, Brand and Mathew (2012) looked at whether Blackboard made a perceived difference to students’ learning. The authors found that the majority of the students find it efficient and useful for visual learners. The studies suggest that LMS technologies tend to lean more on the behaviourist and less on the interpretive and critical teaching and learning practices. In view of the criticism levelled against LMSs, and the soaring numbers in the uptake of Blackboard by lecturers in this particular institution of higher learning, despite criticism of the LMSs, variability and resistance in the use of LMSs in other contexts, this paper sought to explain influences in the adoption of Blackboard from the vintage point of the lecturers who have the experience of using Blackboard. Rogers’ (1995) diffusion of innovation theory is used as a framework to frame research questions, guide data collection, and to interpret the findings.

2.2 Diffusion of innovation theory The diffusion of innovation theory provides some explanation of the factors that influence individual implementers’ possibility to adopt an innovation, policy and/or programme. These are relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability and observability. Relative advantage has to do with the perceived benefit that will accrue as a result of adoption of the innovation, policy and /or programme relative to existing practices. If the perceived relative advantage is greater, then the likelihood of adoption of an innovation, policy or programme is greater also. Compatibility refers to the extent to which an innovation, policy or programme is in congruence with the individual’s existing values and beliefs, previously introduced ideas and needs. Complexity relates to the perceived level of difficulty that individual implementers experience in understanding and using the innovation. The more complex and demanding is the innovation, the less likely is its adoption. Trialability relates to the extent to which the innovation can be experimented with on limited basis. Observability refers to the extent to which the results of the adoption of the innovation, policy or programme can be observed. The more explicit the result, the more likely is the adoption of an innovation, policy or programme (Rogers, 1995). Research Questions

What benefits have accrued as a result of the adoption of Blackboard relative to existing traditional practices?

To what extent is the use of Blackboard congruent with the individual lecturers’ existing beliefs and values?

What is the level of difficulty and experimentation that lecturers experience in understanding and using Blackboard?

303

Vuyisile Nkonki, Siyanda Ntlabathi and Luvuyo Mkonqo

To what extent can the results of the adoption and use of Blackboard be observed?

What do the above influences suggest about the epistemological and pedagogical leanings of lecturers using Blackboard?

3. Research methodology 3.1 Research design This study was undertaken as a qualitative survey design, which, according to Jansen (2010) studies the diversity of a topic within a given population. The primary aim of qualitative surveys is to explore the views of participants as expressed in their own words. It concerns itself with participants’ accounts and evaluations of interactions. He argues further that qualitative survey analysis is used for the exploration of meanings and experiences. Qualitative surveys establish meaningful variations (relevant dimensions and values) within a population. In this instance, the researchers wished to explain the diverse influences in the adoption of Blackboard in a particular institution of higher learning.

3.2 Sampling and data collection Purposive sampling was used since this research targeted lecturers who are on Blackboard. Criterion sampling was employed since it involves including cases or individuals who meet a certain criterion or have a particular life experience (Creswell, 2005). Lectures that use Blackboard for their courses or modules were targeted, and sent questionnaires through email. Nineteen lecturers across campuses and departments, and disciplines of the same institution responded to the qualitative survey questionnaire. A pre‐structured questionnaire where main topics and dimensions are pre‐defined (Jansen 2010) was designed to solicit responses of lectures around the benefits of using Blackboard when compared to traditional practices, the congruence of Blackboard with the lecturers’ beliefs about teaching and learning, the level of difficulty in understanding and using Blackboard, the extent to which Blackboard allows for experimentation, and observability of the benefits of its use. A questionnaire was emailed to a population of lectures that are the users of Blackboard because they have undergone Blackboard training, and continue to receive support from the e‐Learning Consultants.

3.3 Data analysis The transcript was formed by organising the data question by question. This means that all the participants’ responses to a particular question were lumped together. The content analysis method of analysing qualitative data was employed. This involved looking for meaning units, that is, words, short phrases or sentences that communicate a particular view (Struwig and Stead, 2001). The consistencies and the differences within the meaning units were later used to identify themes which were later organised into the preset categories suggested by the research questions (Jansen, 2010). Below, are the narratives of themes and sub‐themes of each category with profound or representative quotes embedded therein.

4. Findings 4.1 Accrued benefits as a result of the adoption of Blackboard relative to existing traditional methods The benefits cited by the sampled lecturers can be categorised into learning and administration. With respect to learning, Blackboard was according one lecturer promoting self‐regulated learning. This lecturer suggested that “students seemed to be encouraged and motivated to study on their own, prior the lectures.” Priori reading in preparation for the class is an important feature of self‐regulated learning, which indicates that students are taking responsibility for their own learning. Related to the above is the observation by another lecturer that “...students...check the notes they take in class against the original lecture notes on Blackboard.” This note‐taking and note‐making exercise is an important learning strategy. Another lecturer saw the benefit offered by Blackboard in the organisation and management of learning resources. He mentioned that “...links to websites and PowerPoint presentation, and all student information is in one learning system.” The other recurring theme relates to adequate class participation as one lecturer remarked “...online discussion allow everybody opportunity to apply their minds, and express an opinion”. Considered opinions, careful and thought through ideas are shared in the online discussions on the Blackboard platform than is the

304

Vuyisile Nkonki, Siyanda Ntlabathi and Luvuyo Mkonqo case with face to face discussions. Reflexivity on own practices was mentioned by one lecturer as a benefit associated with teaching and learning. Continuous assessment and regular feedback were identified as some of the benefits by another lecturer. He expressed the following views “regular online quizzes/tests that firstly, encourage students to study on an on‐going basis. Secondly, it gives me a frequent indication of how well students are coping with each topic.” Regular assessment and feedback not only foster consistent studying throughout the term but enable the lecturer to gauge the extent of learning of each unit of work. On the administration side of things, on lecturer observed the transcendence of the limits of physical space as students and lecturers meet and engage in the virtual space provided by the Blackboard platform. He remarked that “Students convene and engaged in a virtual space yet they were geographically dispersed...this was outside the normal channels e.g. meetings and scheduled trainings”. The view expressed in the following quote “I am able to store information securely” is about the posting of lecture notes which shows that Blackboard provides a secure space for the storage of materials thus fulfilling the repository function. Most of the lecturers’ views suggested that Blackboard afford convenience of access to documents and materials anytime, easily and without wastage of time. Other lecturers opined that efficiency is achieved since time is saved on preparing documents, and distribution of materials. Some of the lecturers maintained that cost effectiveness is a benefit to both lecturers and students since money is saved on printing and purchase of materials. One of the lecturers mentioned “transparency in terms of grades and DPs as students have access to their marks all the time”. The other lecturer suggested that Blackboard is more reliable than the email system.

4.2 Blackboard’s congruence with the individual lecturers’ existing beliefs and values Most of the results seem to agree that to a great extent their beliefs and values are congruent with the use of Blackboard. Below are narratives that suggest that lecturers’ beliefs and values synchronise with Blackboard. One of the lecturers highlighted that Blackboard caters for diverse student needs associated with their learning styles. The remark that “Blackboard teaching is OBE compliant in the sense that it accommodates every student,...students who are reserved to participate during lectures owing to socio‐cultural barriers get the chance to explore on their own”. In the traditional lecture room students have to talk, discuss and ask questions face‐to‐face, with the lecturer and peers present. This intimidates other students, especially those that are shy from making any contributions in class. The other lecturer seems who agree to a great extent on the congruency of Blackboard to lecturers beliefs and values opined that “Blackboard offers many functions and facilities, making it easy to choose those functions which are indeed congruent with my values and beliefs about teaching”. This lecturer highlights that Blackboard offers more choice of functions and features in relation to the lecturer’s approach. From the lecturers’ perspective one can deduce that the lecturer is competent enough in the use of technologies, which can mean he can easily adopt new technologies. The view of one lecturer is that Blackboard should foster an attitude of independence and responsibility for their learning in students. “Students need to take more responsibility for their own learning and using Bb requires of students to do that because it is up to them to check what has been posted with regard to notes, assignments, instructions, notices, etc”. This sentiment echoes Blackboard’s potential to foster self monitoring and self regulation on the part of the students, something which the lecturer values. One of the reasons for the integration of technology into the teaching and learning environment is expressed in the following quote. “I’m one for meeting students where they are. The face book generation can be drawn out to read and write by making use of technology.” The lecturers’ beliefs of tapping into students’ social spaces and harnessing these for teaching and learning purposes is made possible by Blackboard. There are issues highlighted by some lecturers which for them render Blackboard incongruent with their beliefs and values. For example, some few lecturers believe the use of Blackboard may lead to non‐attendance of lectures. One lecture opined that “Blackboard can be abused by those who miss many, or most, of their lectures.” One of the lecturers did not seem to see traditional methods converging with the Blackboard LMS. He further argued that congruence is not an issue in the adoption but that whimsical preferences of lecturers determine the use or non‐use of Blackboard “Lecturers prefer the traditional beliefs and values that are incongruent to the letter and spirit of Blackboard”. This sentiment shows that some lecturers might just choose not to use Blackboard.

305

Vuyisile Nkonki, Siyanda Ntlabathi and Luvuyo Mkonqo

4.3 The level of difficulty in understanding and using Blackboard The perceived level of difficulty that individual implementers experience in understanding and using the innovation is complexity. The majority of the responses described the Blackboard platform as “user friendly” and “fairly easy to use”. The low levels of difficulty were attributed to a number of reasons. One lecturer mentioned that “one does not have to use commands”. The other lecturer attributed this ease of use to “training in the use of Blackboard” whereas, another lecturer mentioned “the tremendous amount of support from the Teaching and Learning Centre”. The experience and expertise of colleagues was mentioned as another factor that mitigated the difficulty of the system. This lecturer had this to say “it has helped a great deal that there are colleagues in my department who have more experience..” There are few lecturers who suggested that Blackboard is a “bit difficult”, or “experienced difficulties to a minimum extent.” They identified the problem as emanating from “the need to keep using [Blackboard] lest you forget the basics... and more practice and assistance”. The other difficulty is related to systemic support. For example, one lecturer remarked that “the biggest headaches are caused when the server is down and students have problems with meeting the deadlines for submissions”. Another user mentioned “a variety of quirks and usability issues that one has to get used to... and some functionality that appears to be missing (e.g. import/export functions).” The other lecturer mentioned “struggles with the use of the plagiarism detection software”. These are navigation problems which require understanding of the LMS.

4.4 Observability of the Blackboard results The responses of the Blackboard users sampled varied from “highly observable”, “unsure”, “difficult to say”, and “variable”. The reasons advanced by those who claim the results are highly observable or observable to a great extent included reduced number of knocks at the door for queries. One lecturer mentioned that he is “able to trace...the service and the duration they visited the site”. Another mentioned that “activities are archived electronically”. Those lectures who were unsure about observability of Blackboard results were either new to Blackboard, such as those who said “it’s early to tell” or had not evaluated the results of the adoption of Blackboard, such as the lecturer who mentioned that “no effort was made to observe”.

5. Discussion This research revealed key results with regard to influences in the adoption of Blackboard. With respect to the benefits of using Blackboard, the results revealed that Blackboard benefitted learning by encouraging students to prepare for lectures by priori reading, comparing notes, organising and managing learning resources, sharing of ideas, reflection on learning, and consistent studying and engaging with the learning contents by the students. On the administration side of things, the majority of Blackboard users seem to be agreeing that the platform offers convenience of access to materials and documents, efficiency in communicating and consulting with students, as well as cost effectiveness on printing and distribution of learning materials. The administration benefits were however, experienced by the majority of the respondent unlike the learning benefits which differed from individual to individual. The findings seem to agree with Lonn and Teasley (2009) who found that Blackboard increased the efficiency of communication. The benefits mentioned above are also consistent with Malikowski, et al (2007) finding that feature usage and benefits were around transmitting course contents, regular assessment through quizzes and creation of class discussions. With respect to Blackboard’s congruence with the lecturers’ beliefs and values, the results seem to agree that there is correspondence to a great extent. The areas of correspondence cited by lecturers included the outcomes based education approach, accommodation of the diverse needs of students, choice of functions and features which allow lecturers to select those that are congruent with their beliefs and values. The findings also revealed that Blackboard has the potential to foster responsibility for own learning which is not only valued by lecturers, but also, congruent with university teaching and learning. The Blackboard platform also corresponds with some lecturers’ beliefs of meeting students in their social spaces and the harnessing of these for spaces for learning purposes. It would seem from the above findings that the argument by Yasar and Adiguzel (2010) that self regulation is limited by the fact that students are restricted by specified activities, and the suggestion that students have no control on the parts and conditions of their own learning is refuted by the above findings. The belief that Blackboard encourages non‐attendance of lectures, and the general preference of traditional methods by some lecturers, it would seem, they do not add up to much in the adoption of Blackboard. The perception that students avoid class attendance confirms Missula’s (2008) notion

306

Vuyisile Nkonki, Siyanda Ntlabathi and Luvuyo Mkonqo of a dehumanising classroom characterised by non‐attendance and absence of class interaction encourage by Blackboard. Research results indicated that the majority of lecturers find the level of difficulty in understanding and experimenting with Blackboard to be generally user friendly. Missula (2008) argues that the ease of use is related to the level of usage, and that Blackboards ease of use enables lecturers to operate the functions with basic navigation skills. The ease of use was attributed to training in the use of Blackboard, support from the e‐ learning practitioners, the experience and expertise of colleagues in the Departments. However, the lack of practice and assistance, technological support, absence of certain functions on Blackboard were identified as some of the difficulties lecturers face. However, Missula (2008) argues that it is navigation problems on the part of the Blackboard users rather than absence of certain functions on Blackboard that explains the difficulties that certain users experience. With respect to the observability of the results, the mixed responses are explained by the fact that some of the respondents have not yet observed the effects of Blackboard on their teaching practices. Some however, mentioned some of the indicators as reduced office visits for consultation by students, others indicated that they have traced the activities, the times spent, and the names of students who visited Blackboard. These results suggest that there is monitoring of Blackboard activities by some lecturers, whereas others do not. Missula (2008) explains these varied responses by arguing that most lecturers are at the basic level of usage, and fail to use the full potential like tracking and monitoring functions which are available on Blackboard.

6. Conclusions and recommendations The benefits of using Blackboard expressed by the lecturers surveyed qualitatively show success areas that need to be consolidated. These success areas included efficiency of communication, storage of materials, access to materials, discussion classes, engagement, instant feedback, and out of class interactions. Areas of concern such as lecturers’ ability to navigate through the site, feature usage, lecturers’ tracing, monitoring and evaluation of Blackboard use by the students are niches for intervention by the e‐Learning practitioners of the institution. Given that lecturers are at different levels, with most lecturers still at the basics level of operating Blackboard, there is need for e‐Learning practitioners to take lecturers to intermediate and higher levels of Blackboard usage. Since most of the accrued benefits, congruence with beliefs and values are with respect to the transmission and transaction models of teaching and learning, there is need to encourage lecturers to try more transformative models of teaching and learning. Given that this institution of higher learning has taken up Blackboard fairly recently, further research needs to be carried out on the bearing that Blackboard has on curriculum design and development, and review. There is need for research on the strategic use of Blackboard to mitigate the effects of large classes. The views of the lecturers who are non‐users of Blackboard need to be interrogated to uncover varied reasons for non‐use. A study on the best ways of enhancing the quality of Blackboard interactions is needed. Also, a study on the contributions of Blackboard to self‐regulated learning needs to be conducted.

References Blin, F. and Munroe, M. (2007) “Why hasn’t technology disrupted academics’ teaching practices? Understanding resistance to change through the lens of activity theory”, Computers & Education. Vol. 50, pp 475‐490. Christie, M. and Garotte, R.J. (2011) “Singapore student teachers’ intentions and practices in integrating technology in their teaching”, In G. Williams, P. Statham, N. Brown & B. Cleland (Eds), Changing Demands, Changing Directions. Proceedings ascilite Hobart 2011. pp 234‐238. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/hobart11/procs/Christie‐ concise.pdf. Creswell, J.W. (2005) Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey. Fallery, B. and Rodhain, H. (2011) “Three Epistemological Foundations on e‐Learning Models”, International Conference on e‐Education, Entertainment, and e‐Management. Jakarta: Indonesia. http://hal.archive‐ouvertes. fr/docs/00/77/78/35/P. Hanley, L. (2011). Mashing up the institution: Teacher as bricoleur. Radical Teacher, Vol. 90, pp 9‐14. Jansen, H. (2010) “The Logic of Qualitative Survey Research and its Position in the Field of Social Research Methods [63 paragraphs]”, Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, Vol. 11, No. 2, Art. 11, http://nbn‐resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114‐fqs1002110 Kinash, S., Brand, J. and Mathew, T. (2012), “Challenging mobile learning discourse through research: Student perceptions of Blackboard Mobile Learn and iPads”, Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 28, No.4, pp 639‐655.

307

Vuyisile Nkonki, Siyanda Ntlabathi and Luvuyo Mkonqo Lonn, S. and Teasley, S.D. (2009) “Saving time or innovating practice: Investigating perceptions and uses of Learning Management Systems”, Computers & Education, Vol. 53, pp 686‐694. Mafuna, M. and Wadesango, N. (2012). “Students’ Acceptance and Experience of the New Learning Management System (LMS) – Wiseup”, Anthropologist, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp 311‐318. Malikowski, S.R., Thompson, M.E., and Theis, J.G. (2007) “A Model for Research into Course Management Systems: Bridging Technology and Learning Theory”, Journal of Educational Computing Research, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp 149‐173. Mayers, T. and de Freitas, S. (2004) “JISC e‐Learning Models Desk Study: Review of e‐learning theories, frameworks and models Manchester”, Joint Information Systems Committee. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_document/stage . Accessed 03/02/2013. Missula, S. (2008) Staff Perceptions of Blackboard as an online teaching tool in Tertiary Education. (Unpublished Master of Computing Dissertation, UNITEC, New Zealand). Mlitwa, N. (undated). “e‐Learning and learning management systems (LMS) in a changing higher education environment”, Transforming IS & CS Education and Research in a Changing Higher Education Environment Conference. Cape Town, South Africa. Mlitwa, N. and van Belle, J. (2010). “A Proposed Interpretivist Framework to Research the Adoption of Learning Management Systems in Universities”, Communications of the IBIMA. Article ID 574872, IBIMA Publishing. Monarch Media (2010). Open‐Source Learning Management Systems: Sakai and Moodle. Monarch Media Inc, California. Phahlane, M.M. and Kekwaletswe, R.M. (2012). “Contextualized Framework for Ubiquitous Learning Support Using a Learning Management System”, International Journal of Computer and Information Technology, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp 109‐ 112. Rogers, E.M. (1995) Diffusion of Innovations (Fourth Edition), Free Press, New York. Selwyn, N. (2007) “The use of computer technology in university teaching and learning: a critical perspective”, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, Vol. 23, 83094. Solomon, T.C. and Makara, K. (2010) “How does LMS Use Affect Instructional Time?” ICLS, Vol. 2, pp 37‐138. Struwig, F.W. and Stead, G.B. (2001) Planning, designing and reporting research, Pearson Education South Africa, Cape Town. Venter, P., van Rensburg, M.J. and Davis, A. (2012) “Drivers of learning management system use in a South African open and distance learning institution”, Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp183‐198. Yasar, O. and Adiguzel, T. (2010) “A working successor of learning management systems: SLOODLE”, Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences, Vol. 2, pp 5682‐5685.

308

Students as Creative Producers Travis Noakes, Laura Czerniewicz and Cheryl Brown University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa travis.noakes@uct.ac.za laura.czerniewicz@uct.ac.za cheryl.brown@uct.ac.za Abstract: This paper follows two South African Media Studies university students and their activities as producers of online content. It considers the online publication services they chose to express media‐related academic and creative interests outside of formal curriculum requirements. Through peer guidance and using online search, both students were able to access educational resources and communities of expertise relevant to varied creative production interests. These relationships supported self‐directed and interest‐driven learning across academic, civic and career domains. Such cross‐ linkages are a unique feature of the pedagogical approach of ‘Connected Learning’ (Ito et al., 2013), which knits together three crucial contexts for learning: peer‐ supported, interest‐powered and academically‐oriented. It argues that learners flourish and achieve their potential when they can connect their interests and social engagement to academic studies, civic engagement, and career opportunity. This paper shows how the varied online publication services used by both students provided them with inter‐connected and relevant extramural experiences. Keywords: students, web2.0, creative production, connected learning

1. Background This paper results from a phase of a research project that explored the access and use of digital technologies in the learning and everyday lives of South African university students. It focuses on the two students in terms of their activities as online producers of content, the respective services they chose; the trajectories and linkages of their career interests; and the types of online presences they created, maintained or discontinued into their third year at university. Using Connected Learning (CL) as a heuristic, it also considers how both cases show varying interconnectedness between the students’ curricular, interest‐driven and socially‐embedded, learning experiences.

2. Students as creative producers In recent years there has been a massive growth in self‐publishing on the internet which relies on ‘Web2.0’ technologies (O’Reilly, 2005). These support social networks that exhibit the characteristics of a rich‐user experience, user‐participation, dynamic content, one‐to‐one data, web standards compliance and scalability (Best, 2006). This enables a ‘read‐write web’ whereby readers can easily become producers, replacing the broadcast nature of Web1.0 (Gilmor, 2004). These online services enable the user to: create a bounded profile linked to a social network of ‘friends’, groups and interests; subscribe to their updates; share text, image, video and audio content; provide feedback on other users’ content through reviews and tagging content and data; controlling privacy settings; and sharing and linking to similar online services, at low or no cost (Cormode & Krishnamurthy, 2008). Many Web2.0‐based, online services are ‘social networks’ that enable their users to create, share and show connections. Social networks are services that (1) allow individuals to construct a public or semi‐public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system (boyd and Ellison, 2007). Contributing to the high uptake of these services is that they are “free”,with no direct financial costs to end‐users. These new forms of social media and technology afford new practices and can be viewed as part of a broader set of social structures and cultural patterns (Ito et al., 2010). Ethnographic and other qualitative approaches used by researchers have surfaced, inter alia, organising descriptions around the foundational social practices of: ‘friendship’, ‘intimacy’, ‘family’, ‘gaming’, ‘creative production’ and ‘work’. Although evidence collected in the fourth phase of the ICT Access and Use (ICTAU, 2013) uncovered these practices amongst students, this paper focuses on their creative production. Creative production research in the global North has explored the use of diverse media formats, such as: creative writing media (Willett, 2001 in the UK); digital publishing (Booth, 1999 in the UK); wikis, blogs and podcasts (Richardson, 2010, in the USA); games and media‐rich computer programming (Wang and Chen, 2010

309

Travis Noakes, Laura Czerniewicz and Cheryl Brown in Taiwan); alternate reality game authoring (Connolly, Stansfield, Hainey, 2011 in the EU); video production (Buckingham, Fisherkeller, Horst, 2003 in the UK); multimedia production projects (Tripp and Herr‐Stephenson, 2009 in the USA) and music‐making (Mahendran, 2007 in the USA). In contrast with this abundance of research, while general studies in South Africa have described the use of technologies by students (Thinyane, 2010. Czerniewicz and Brown, 2010.) and the prevalence of their social media use (SA Student Social Media Report, 2009), there is little research into the creative production of students. This may reflect the constraints that many face in exercising personal agency and overcoming challenges to accessing and using appropriate technological‐, content‐ and contextual resources (Czerniewicz and Brown, 2005). Learners, in particular, face great resourcing challenges and many are limited to making media production experiments in free public access venues, such as municipal libraries, or costly cyber cafes (Walton and Donner, 2012). A few studies have covered creative production of students or learners with these formats; blogging (Cronje, 2012), wikis (Rowe, 2012), video editing and production (Deacon, Morrison, Stadler. 2005), filming and editing with smartphones (Hassreiter, Walton, Marsden. 2011), Visual Arts e‐portfolio design (Noakes, 2012.) and music‐making (Haupt, 2012.) There is a research gap in the local literature concerning the creative production by students of online writing presences, podcasts, games and multimedia projects. This is interesting in a context where there is high growth in the use of social networks. Mxit, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and Google Plus being the largest, platform‐neutral, social networks in SA (Vermeulen, 2012).

3. The connected learning framework During the analysis phase, it became clear that these two case studies reveal high levels of resonance with CL, specifically in terms of students being able pursue their interests with the support of online peers and linking their activities across academic, civic and/or career domains. The CL Framework (Ito et al., 2013) is of interest to researchers seeking a way of understanding and describing the linkages between the formal and the informal, between curricular and extracurricular activities and across the academic and the personal spaces in the lives of students. CL differentiates itself from other educational approaches in its explicit focus on learning that is linked across the settings of ‘school’, ‘home’, ‘peer’, and ‘popular culture’. A key contribution is its attention to the creation of social, cultural, and technological foci that enable young people to link, integrate, and translate their interests across academic, civic, and career‐relevant domains. CL posits that through linking these different spheres of learning—’peer culture’, ‘interests’ and ‘academic subjects’— interest‐driven and meaningful learning can be better supported in ways that take advantage of the democratizing potential of digital networks and online resources. The CL Framework indicators (Ito et al., 2013) knits together three ‘contexts for learning’ (peer supported, interest powered and academically oriented). The ‘core properties’ of a CL experience is that it is production‐ centered, there is a shared purpose and it is openly‐networked. The ‘design principles’ that inform the intentional connecting of learning environments are that everyone can participate, learning happens by doing, challenge is constant and everything is interconnected. Finally, ‘online services amplify opportunities for CL’, through fostering engagement and self‐expression, increasing accessibility to knowledge and learning experiences, expanding social supports for interests and expanding diversity and building capacity. The rationale of CL for focusing on younger people is that they are forming interests and social identities, developing an orientation to learning and making decisions leading to certain job or career opportunities (Ito et al, 2013).

4. The study This paper uses an holistic, multiple case study method (Yin, 2008) to explore the extramural, online publication services used by the two students for creative production. It illustrates how students creative production activities included indicators of CL, and shows the blurring or not blurring of boundaries between formal and informal practices and the academic and the personal (Czerniewicz and Brown, 2010). The fourth phase of an International Development Research Centre (IDRC)‐funded project used a ‘digital ethnography’ approach to explore the digital practices of 23 first‐year students across four universities in SA. Locally based researchers gathered a range of data from each subject including video interviews, focus group discussion; video diaries of participants ICT use and Facebook observations. This evidence was transcribed and

310

Travis Noakes, Laura Czerniewicz and Cheryl Brown collated into the qualitative research software, NVivo 9, for analysis based on four coding matrices guided by the research framework. The multiple strategies used to collect this evidence revealed student activities in context and provided a more nuanced description of the role of technologies for study and leisure purposes in student life, as reflected in the case study for a rural student, (Czerniewicz and Brown, 2012a) and ‘digital strangers’ (Czerniewicz and Brown, 2012b). Data concerning the students extramural use of online publication services for creative production is presented along with additional questions posed to investigate synergies with CL. Both students were given the opportunity to read and review this article which was refined based on their subsequent feedback, as recommended for trustworthiness and validity by Yin (2008).

5. The cases Whilst all of the students in the study used social networks to support friendships, the two cases highlighted here were unusual in that as first year Media Studies students’ they were using online sites to pursue extramural creative production: the online writing platforms ‘Fanstory’ and ‘Wattpad’ for poetry and a personal journal; the micro‐blogging service, ‘Twitter’ for tweets and amplification, and the video services, ‘YouTube’ and ‘Vimeo’ for sharing video creations.

5.1 Vince Vince is a 21 year‐old, third year student in UCT’s Humanities Faculty. He stays in a university residence and is technologically well‐resourced. He owns a Blackberry and a laptop. He has a long history of ICT use, having owned his first mobile phone when he was twelve. However, he did not have any formal exposure to ICT and was not interested in the opportunity to take secondary school courses in IT. Vince demonstrates high levels of personal agency in his ICT use for creative production. He originally presented himself as a songwriter and poet in 2011. Since doing practical film work at UCT, he has changed his self‐presentation online. He now describes himself as a ‘Filmmaker, director and scriptwriter’ on Twitter and Google Plus. He has also moved to predominantly using film‐related online services. The move Vince made from extramural writing to focussing on academic and career‐ orientated film activities, reflects CL indicators in being interest‐powered and linking academically‐orientated, peer‐supported and career‐related contexts. In his first‐year, both the social networking and online writing platform presences of Vince reflected his interests in songwriting. Regarding his Facebook status updates, he said, ‘I don't write like those stupid personal statuses, where like you are having a cup of tea with your best friend. No. If I find something which is quite insightful or profound or interesting, then I will put it up and see how people react to it.’ This suited his interest as a songwriter, who sings for a band. He finds it interesting to, ‘see how how people react to stuff that I write’ (Int1, 2011, R16) and values the reactions of his social media peers. This links to the CL indicators for fostering engagement and expanding social support for interests. Vince often used online search to find writing competitions in 2011, ‘... often I feel like writing, so I'll randomly just try to find a writing competition. Because I'm always, either I'm writing songs or I'm writing poems, or something of the sort. Um, ja. So what do I do?’ (Int2, 2011, R14). He registered on Fanstory for free and used it for submitting poetry before choosing to subscribe to the service at $30 a year, to ‘get like tonnes of reviews. You have to pay for it, but it is really cool.’ (Int2, 2011, R13). He enjoyed having his work reviewed. Some reviewers were unusual in sharing personal details. For example in response to a poem Vince wrote for his Dad’s Birthday, an American mother wrote; ‘My three sons are just a little younger than you and would dearly love to think of their father this way, because they are fine young men, like you they do love him, even though he doesn't know they exist, only as showpieces when they do well. Always value your relationship with your Dad.’ Intensely personal reviews and a close online friendship he had made contributed to Vince’s belief that, ‘it really is an online community.’ Participation in this online community also assisted him to be more receptive to criticism, ‘I was extremely defensive of my poetry when I joined the site and gradually learned to calm down more and try to better understand and consider the reviewers criticisms before I launched into a diatribe.’ (email, 07/02/2012).

311

Travis Noakes, Laura Czerniewicz and Cheryl Brown Vince took advantage of the engagement and feedback from his Fanstory peers to become more accepting of constructive criticism and more considerate in delivering his. Vince also reviewed the work of other Fanstory writers, but had to refine an approach that was initially too honest and critical, ‘... after a while of, um, seeing other people's reviews and stuff, I realised that actually, no, this site is more like, it is to help people to get better at writing. So, it's not really that objective, it's kind of like, give each other nice ratings and prop each other up, thing. So, it's less harsh than I understood and it is more of an online community, like people are friendly. And it is nice as you are sharing something intimate.’ (Int2, 2011, R32). Vince could participate in several first year media production projects, including script‐ and article writing. However, he perceived the scope for feedback on his unofficial interests to be limited. He said that there were ‘no opportunities for feedback on my creative writing, including poetry’ (email, 07/02/2012). Vince also uses social networks to engage his immediate acquaintances with his civic thoughts; ‘I often feel a bit preachy and stand on my social network soapbox to voice my qualms ‐ sometimes I get a good response’ (email, 07/02/2012). He believes this is probably more akin to exerting ‘online peer pressure’, than participating in the civil domain. Vince has contributed poetry to voices.net and an article to a friend’s Varsity Vibes website in 2011. He believes his online writing work has given him, ‘confidence in my creative writing and encouraged me to indulge (often to my detriment) in poetic descriptions within my discursive essays (especially in English Literature).’ (email, 07/02/2012). This reflects a CL indicator in building capacity During 2012, his entire online footprint changed from one that which ‘reflects the identity of a confused but inspired and enthusiastic song writer (in which I would try to emulate the rebellious voice and philosophies of my namesake ‐ Bob Dylan ‐ in little lyric status updates) to one that reflects the calmer, but no less confused, identity of an aspiring film maker (in which I would offer my thoughts on movies I love and my activities).’ (email, 07/02/2012). Vince now highlights his career ambition through describing himself as a ‘Film maker/ Director/ Screenwriter’ on his Twitter, Google Plus and LinkedIn accounts. He further describes himself as co‐ owner of a film‐making business. He has created a YouTube video channel and a Vimeo account, both of which feature videos he has worked on at University and privately. He has also published a documentary pitch presentation to Prezi. He believes these presences support his ability to network and develop a career in film: He describes his online presences as a ‘better way for people to get to know me and what I have to say’, helping him to develop social support in a film‐industry that ‘seems to boil down to the old axiom that "it's not what you know, it's who you know" and what better way for people to get to know me and what I have to say than my online writing (including Facebook, Youtube and Twitter). Not to mention my ability to connect with the people that I need to know through these social networking sites. In no way am I saying that I think my "online writing presence" is of a good quality but rather that it gives me the opportunity to have a voice.’ (email, 07/02/2012) These presences reflect the CL ‘design principle’ indicator ‘everything is interconnected’. Using these varied service contexts gives Vince the opportunity to develop mastery of specialist practices. His online presences have enabled him to connect with important people and organisations, like the Ghetto Film School of LA (GFS). The GFS is an arts programme that primarily assists learners in the US with developing story‐ and film‐making skills and organises a MasterClass for international students via Google Plus’ Hangouts. In 2012 Vince entered a GFS competition and used it to produce an expertly crafted and visually arresting video which was chosen to be showcased at the Sundance Film Festival in 2013 and consequently sponsored his attendance. This is arguably an indicator of CL expanding diversity and building capacity in facilitating the participation of a previously peripheral Global South student into an American event.

5.2 Odette Odette (22) is a third year, BA in Film and Media student. She did not own a laptop in first‐year, but could access social networks via her Samsung smartphone. She prefers to view the internet on the computer screen and accesses it mainly on campus; in the library or computer labs. She also occasionally accessed the internet on her boyfriend’s laptop, using her or her sister’s mobile phone as a modem.

312

Travis Noakes, Laura Czerniewicz and Cheryl Brown Odette is very cautious about sharing her creative writing online. This lead to her example featuring CL indicators for an interested powered activity, journal writing, that had some potential to foster her interest through social support. Although she could publish other personal projects, she voiced two concerns that limited the type and extent of her publication; initially she was concerned that her fiction would be critiqued by online viewers, then she also became concerned about copyright. While she stated that she could write emails to herself to protect her copyright, she believes that the safest for her is to, ‘be professional with my projects and not place them on Wattpad (an online writing platform supporting a community of aspiring writers.)’ (Int1, 2011, R5). This distinction is also reflected in her use of a business and private email address; she created a Gmail account specifically for contacting publishers and businesses, while using a Hotmail account for her private correspondence. This shows a careful control of her online identity. Odette did decide to create an account under the Wattpad online writing platform. She chose to write to it under a pseudonym and publishes an autobiographical journal to Wattpad. She prefers using this to a physical journal, as the digital one is under a pseudonym, so it ‘cannot be linked to her’ (Int1, 2011, R5). She originally used to write her journal in ‘actual books’ and she was not completely herself as she knew someone might find it. As it is under a different name online, she believes it is highly unlikely that someone will find it. As a result, she is more at peace using a medium where she feels she can share her ‘deepest and darkest secrets’. (Int1, 2011, R12). From a CL perspective this supports limited engagement, however the publication of her journal to Wattpad still provides a forum for her self‐expression. There is also potential for connection with peers online around the common interest of journal‐writing. Most of the work she does on Wattpad is on her journal. Although she does not use it for feedback, she does ‘feel that someone is there’. She also believes that people would not typically want to give an author feedback on their journal. She remarked that ‘No one has really commented, although they can’. She has also used Wattpad to put up a story that she did not plan on publishing, as she had taken its idea and changed it into a script. She did upload a second draft of one of her fantasy novels, but under a different pseudonym, and entered a poem into a Wattpad competition. Although Wattpad affords social network functionality, Odette has not made friends on the service. She only has one friend on it, who does not know it is a presence by Odette. She believes that the service is far more popular in USA, where it is like a ‘group of friends’. By contrast, she does not really communicate with other users, unless they tell her that her work is really good. ‘Wattpad is less communication than expressing yourself. People like to be appreciated; if people like your work that's cool. Having your work online also looks cool.’ (Int1, 2011, R10). Odette does not feature her creative production work on other sites. However she does use publically searchable FB and Pinterest accounts to share her interests: Her FB account reflects a Manga imagery interest under an image album ‘Today I feel’, which includes over 200 appropriated cartoon images. Odette also uses Pinterest under her surname and a nickname to share visual imagery that inspires her as a self‐described ‘Writer. Artist. Thought experiment.’ under categories that include ‘faces’, ‘honestly’ and ‘art’. An online search reveals that Odette has also largely separated her extramural creative production interests and her career‐related, film‐related acting and modelling presences. Her LinkedIn profile describes her as currently at ‘L'Agence TKN Models’ agency, and she is listed as a model online under her first name, although she is searchable with her full name via Google. Odette did not bridge her academic and career‐related interests. There is minimal overlap between her presences for; friendship (FB), inspiration (Pinterest), creative production (Wattpad) and work activities (LinkedIn and actor/modelling). Nor did Odette want to receive critical feedback on her writing. Both her copyright and feedback concerns contributed to her example having fewer indicators for CL than Vince. Interestingly though, hers is arguably the most nuanced and carefully managed online footprint of the two. Due to copyright concerns, she chose not to create a presence as an aspirant writer. This contrasts to the approach of Vince, who assumes his copyright will be respected, ‘The thing is have not checked it (copyright) out. I have been just like ‘Wow ‐ writing site!’, BAM! throw it on there. And because there are so many people,

313

Travis Noakes, Laura Czerniewicz and Cheryl Brown I assume that copyright means you get to keep your own work. Especially, because you can actually sell your work through the site.’ (Int2, 2011, R37). Odette has also been consistent in continuing to use the creative presence she created. By contrast, Vince has switched and stopped using services as his interests changed: Vince switched his online presences from poetry and songwriting to film direction and script‐writing.

6. Concluding discussion This paper makes a small contribution to closing a gap in the literature concerning South African students and their extramural creative production with varied online services. By exploring how the students used different services to express their creative interests, the researchers have revealed the presence of many indicators for Connected Learning. As an approach to learning and design, research on the CL framework originally centered on secondary school learners in the U.S. and Great Britain. This paper reveals that a CL framework is also relevant for the extramural, online creative production activities of university students elsewhere in the world. Both student examples featured the core properties of the CL framework in taking advantage of openly networked, online publication services to produce presences that fostered self‐expression. Their extramural use of these new media services also expanded the potential social support for their extramural or co‐ curricular interests with online peers. Through this, the students could experience learning experiences and build their capabilities. Their examples also demonstrated the design principles of CL, even though they were student‐led: the well‐ resourced students learnt through doing, faced continual challenges and could connect different domains. The extent of this varied by student; Vince had socially‐ embedded, interest‐driven, educational experiences across varied domains. Odette had legitimate copyright and feedback concerns that resulted in a more nuanced use of online presences, although fewer indicators were present. Further, these case studies suggest that interest‐powered, online creative production can have important benefits for students: feedback from online peers helped students to improve their creative skills and helped build their confidence; by serving as a space for students to reflect on, and define, their interests, the students experienced personal growth; and in using online publication services to bridge academic, civic and career domains, the students had opportunities to reflect on their roles within, and across, these domains.

References Best, D. (2006) “Web 2.0: Next Big Thing or Next Big Internet Bubble?”, [online], Freie Universität Berlin, http://page.mi.fu‐ berlin.de/~best/uni/WIS/Web2.pdf. Booth, J. (1999) "A case study in educational publishing for and by young people." Young people, creativity and new technologies, Routledge, London, pp 42‐56. Boyd, D. and Ellison, N. (2007) "Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship", Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp 210 ‐ 230. Connolly, T.M., Stansfield, M. & Hainey, T. (2011) "An alternate reality game for language learning: ARGuing for multilingual motivation", Computers & Education, Vol. 57, No. 1, pp 1389‐1415. Cormode, G. & Krishnamurthy, B. (2008) "Key differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0”, First Monday, Vol. 13, No. 6, pp 2. Cronje, F. (2012) "Extreme Blogging as Teaching Methodology", eMerge Conference, Cape Town, South Africa, 2012. Czerniewicz, L. & Brown, C. (2005) "Access to ICTs for teaching and learning: From single artefact to inter‐related resources", International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, Vol. 1, No. 2. Czerniewicz, L. & Brown, C. (2010) "Strengthening and weakening boundaries: Students negotiating technology mediated learning", Changing Cultures in Higher Education, pp 285‐298. Czerniewicz, L and Brown, C (2012a) “The habitus and technological practices of rural students: a case study”, Paper read at the Higher Education, Learning and Teaching Association of South Africa Conference, 2012, Cape Town, South Africa. Czerniewicz, L. & Brown, C. (2012b) "The habitus of digital “strangers” in higher education", British Journal of Educational Technology, 2012. Deacon, A., Morrison, A. & Stadler, J. (2005) "Designing for learning through multimodal production: Film narrative and spectatorship in Director's Cut", International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, vol. 1, no. 1. Gillmor, D. (2004) "The read‐write web", We the Media‐Grassroots Journalism by the People, for the People. O'Reilly Media Inc, California. Haupt, Adam. (2012) Static: Race and Representation in Post‐apartheid Music, Media and Film more, HSRC Press, Cape Town.

314

Travis Noakes, Laura Czerniewicz and Cheryl Brown ICTAU (2013) “Access and Use project” [online], University of Cape Town, http://www.cet.uct.ac.za/virtualmobius. Ito, Mizuko. et al. (2010) Hanging Out, Messing Around, and Geeking Out, MIT Press, Massachusetts. Ito, Mizuko, Kris Gutiérrez, Sonia Livingstone, Bill Penuel, Jean Rhodes, Katie Salen, Juliet Schor, Julian Sefton‐Green, S. Craig Watkins. (2013) Connected Learning: An Agenda for Research and Design. Digital Media and Learning Research Hub. Irvine.ITU. (2011) “Mobile‐cellular subscriptions per 100 inhabitants, 2001–2011.” [online], ITU, http://tinyurl.com/b5luvg9. ITU. (2012) “Key statistical highlights: ITU data release June 2012.” [online], ITU, http://tinyurl.com/b88n7r7. Kafai, Y.B. & Peppler, K.A. (2011) “Youth, Technology, and DIY Developing Participatory Competencies in Creative Media Production”, Review of Research in Education, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 89‐119. Wang, Li‐Chun & Chen, Ming‐Puu (2010) "Learning Programming Concepts through Game Design: A PCT Perspective", Paper read at the Digital Game and Intelligent Toy Enhanced Learning (DIGITEL), 2010 Third IEEE International Conference, Chengdu, China, July. Mahendran, D. (2007) "The Facticity of Blackness", Human Architecture: Journal of the Sociology of Self‐Knowledge, Vol. 5, pp. 198. Niesyto, H., Buckingham, D. & Fisherkeller, J. (2003) "Video Culture Crossing Borders with Young People's Video Productions", Television & New Media, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 461‐482. Noakes, Travis. (2012) "Online Portfolio Curricular Appropriation, Visual Arts Classroom Changes and Conversations.", Paper read at the 2012 Design Development and Research Conference, Cape Town, September. Oliver, Beverley. (2005) "Mobile blogging,‘Skyping’ and podcasting: Targeting undergraduates’ communication skills in transnational learning contexts”, Microlearning, Vol. 107, No. 4, pp. 587‐600. O'Reilly, T. (2005) “What Is Web 2.0 Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software”, [online], O’Reilly, http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what‐is‐web‐20.html. Oyedemi, T.D. (2011) "Digital inequalities and implications for social inequalities: A study of Internet penetration amongst university students in South Africa", Telematics and Informatics. Richardson, W. (2010) Blogs, wikis, podcasts, and other powerful web tools for classrooms, Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks. Rowe, M. (2012) "The use of a wiki to facilitate collaborative learning in a South African physiotherapy department", South African Journal of Physiotherapy, Vol. 68, No. 2, pp. 11‐16. Schneier, Bruce. (2010) “Privacy and Control.” [online], Bruce Schneier, http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/04/privacy_and_con.html Student Village and I.R. (2009) “SA Student Social Media Report”, Johannesburg. Thinyane, H. (2010) "Are digital natives a world‐wide phenomenon? An investigation into South African first year students’ use and experience with technology", Computers & Education, Vol. 55, No. 1, pp. 406‐414. Tripp, L.M. & Herr‐Stephenson, R. (2009) "Making access meaningful: Latino young people using digital media at home and at school", Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 1190‐1207. Vermeulen, J. (2012) “Biggest social networks in South Africa.” [online], MyBroadband, http://tinyurl.com/ab4ecjl. Walton, M., Marsden, G., Haßreiter, S. & Allen, S. (2012) "Degrees of sharing: Proximate media sharing and messaging by young people in Khayelitsha", Paper read at the 14th International Conference on Human‐Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, New York. Walton, M. and J. Donner. (2012) “Spatial injustices and mobile communication: Patterns of internet access in urban South Africa”. Paper read at the International Communication Association 2012, Phoenix. Willett, R.J. (2001) Children's use of popular media in their creative writing. University of London, London. World FactBook. (2011) “Country comparison: Telephones – main lines in use.” [online], CIA, http://tinyurl.com/axaemu5. World FactBook. (2011) “Country comparison: Telephones – mobile cellular.” [online], CIA, http://tinyurl.com/a8g4y7d. Yin, R.K. (2008) Case study research: Design and methods, Sage Publications Incorporated, Thousand Oaks.

315

Age, Gender, and Computer Self‐Efficacy as Correlates of Social Media Usage for Scholarly Works in Nigeria Maruff Akinwale Oladejo1, Olajide Olawole Adelua2 and Nelson Aderemi Ige3 1 University of Lagos, Akoka, Nigeria 2 Federal College of Education (Special), Oyo, Nigeria 3 Adeniran Ogunsanya College of Education, Ijanikin, Nigeria maruvoladejo@rocketmail.com Abstract: In recent years, there has been an unprecedented upsurge in the use of social media in diverse human endeavours, education inclusive. In fact, social media are infiltrating the educational arena on daily basis. However, in spite of growing popularity of personal use of these social media, a low percentage of students and instructors use them for educational purposes. It appears there is limited usage of social media in the academic world. This study therefore investigated age, gender, computer self‐efficacy as correlates of social media usage for scholarly works in Nigeria. The study adopted correlational survey research design, which is 'ex‐post facto' in nature. One hundred and fifty academics participated in the study. Four hypotheses were formulated and tested at .05 level of significance. Findings revealed significant differences in social media usage for scholarly works based on age (t=2.35, df= 148, P <0.05), gender (t=2.37, df= 148, P <0.05), institution (t=3.09, df= 148, P <0.05). Social media usage is indispensable in the contemporary academic works. Scholarly works through social media usage will enable faculties to keep abreast of latest trends in their various disciplines. Therefore, Nigerian academics should embrace social media usage with a view to improving upon their scholarly activities, and also be at par with their counterparts across the globe. Keywords: social media, scholarly works, computer self‐efficacy, gender, age, Nigerian academics

1. Introduction In recent years, there has been an unprecedented upsurge in the use of social media in diverse human endeavours, education inclusive. In fact, social media are infiltrating the educational arena on daily basis. According to (Sponcil & Gitimu, nd), social media networks have created a phenomenon on the internet that has gained popularity over the last decade. People use social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter, and Myspace to create and sustain relationships with others (Boyd & Ellison, 2007). Social network sites according to (Boyd & Ellison) are public web‐based services that allow users to develop a personal profile, identify other users (“friends”) with whom they have a connection, read and react to postings made by other users on the site, and send and receive messages either privately or publicly. These social media sites let those who use them create personal profiles, while connecting with other users of the sites. Users can upload photographs, post what they are doing at any given time, and send personal or public messages to whomever they choose. In this “information age,” social media sites seem to be growing in popularity rapidly, especially among young adults (Pempek, Yermolayeva, & Calvert, 2008). (Sam, Othman, & Nordin, 2005) argued that the rapid growth of the use of the Internet brings up the question of whether the gender, age, and computer use issues are still relevant with regard to social media usage. The present study therefore, investigated the extent to which age, gender and computer self‐efficacy determine social media usage for scholarly works among Nigerian academics.

2. Statement of the problem It has been observed that sociability is an underlying theme in using all forms of social media (Sponcil & Gitimu, nd). Since this social media phenomenon is continuing to grow at a fast pace, it is important to understand their usability for scholarly works. The present study therefore investigated age, gender, and computer self‐efficacy as correlates of social media usage for scholarly works in Nigeria.

3. Hypotheses Four hypotheses were formulated to guide the conduct of this study. These hypotheses were tested at .05 level of significance. The hypotheses are: HO1: Social media usage for scholarly works by Nigerian Academics is not significantly different on the basis of Gender.

316

Maruff Akinwale Oladejo, Olajide Olawole Adelua and Nelson Aderemi Ige HO2: There is no significant difference in Social media usage by the Nigerian Academics based on Age. HO3: Social media usage for scholarly works by the Nigerian College Academics is not significantly different on the basis of rank. HO4: Institutional affiliation has no significant difference in social media usage for scholarly works by Nigerian Academics.

4. Literature review on age, gender, computer self‐efficacy and social media usage This sub‐section had a brief review of related literature. This was done with a view to highlighting the relevance of each of the variables in the study. Some studies related to the present study are reviewed. On the issue of gender and age as correlates of social media usage for scholarly works, (Sangwon & Moonhee, 2011) maintained that although, there are some gender differences in social media usage, age is a greater differentiator. Age, not gender, drives most social media use. On the other hand, (Sponcil & Gitimu, nd), posited that gender is the only significant demographic variable affecting social media use, as there are some differences between use by men and women. Women are more likely than men to have a personal profile on Facebook, but men are more likely than women to sustain a profile on LinkedIn (Lenhart, Purcell, Smith, & Zickuhr, 2010). Furthermore, (Tufekci, 2008) reported that women were four to five times more likely than men to use social networking sites. Moreover, Sheldon (2008) found that overall women were more likely to use social media for maintaining relationships with family and friends, passing time, and entertainment, but men were more likely to use social media to meet new people. As regards computer self‐efficacy (CSE) as a variable in the present study, some scholars have come up with various definitions. For instance, (Compeau & Higgins, 1995:192) defined self‐efficacy as “people’s judgments of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performances. Thus, Bandura (1986: 391) submitted that computer self‐efficacy is “a judgment of one’s capability to use a computer”. (Compeau & Higgins, 1995) contended that computer self‐efficacy has a major impact on an individual’s expectations towards using computers. This is because those who did not see themselves as competent in computer usage were less likely to use computers (Kinzie & Delcourt, 1991; Oliver & Shapiro, 1993). (Oliver Shapiro, 1993) contended that CSE is significantly related to social media usage.

5. Materials and methodology This sub‐section presents information on the methodology adopted in carrying out the study. It covers design, sample and sampling technique, instrumentation, administration of the instrument and the method of data analysis.

6. Design The study adopted the correlational survey design where the variables are examined “ex‐post facto”. Correlational research design was found appropriate because attempt was made at examining the relationship between some selected variables and social media usage for scholarly works. An “ex‐post facto “study is described as: A systematic empirical inquiry in which the scientist does not have direct control of independent variables because their manifestations have already occurred or because they are inherently not manipulable. Inferences about relations among variables are made without direct interaction from concomitant variation of independent and dependent variable, Kerlinger (in Oladejo, 2010: 264).

7. Sample and sampling techniques One hundred and five male academics and forty‐five female academics participated in the study. This gave us, a total number of 150 participants. These participants were selected through stratified simple random sampling technique. They were drawn from Universities and Colleges of Education where the Researchers are working as academics.

317

Maruff Akinwale Oladejo, Olajide Olawole Adelua and Nelson Aderemi Ige

8. Instrumentation An adopted questionnaire was used to collect data for this study. The questionnaire was divided into five sections. Section A collected demographic characteristics such as age, gender, institutional affiliations, while Section B of the questionnaire required the subjects to complete the Computer Self‐Efficacy Scale Rating Scale (CSERS) to assess the subjects’ level of computer self‐efficacy CSERS is a 10 items self‐report inventory, designed and validated by (Oladejo, 2010). The subjects responded on a four‐point Likert type scale (1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=agree, and 4=strongly agree). Another reliability study was carried out using 30 academics at the College of Education who were not part of the main study. Cronbach s coefficient was computed based on their responses. The alpha values obtained was 0.85. Thus, this instrument was found reliable for the study.

9. Administration of instrument The Researchers collected data during various Departmental seminars when Academics usually converge for scholarly works. Two hundred questionnaires were distributed, out of which one hundred and eight‐six copies of them were returned. This gave 98.5% rate of return However, 36 out of these questionnaires were not completely filled. The remaining 150 copies found to be appropriately and completely filled were used for the study.

10. Method of data analysis Student t‐test was used to test the four hypotheses. This statistical toolwas found appropriate because the Researchers were interested in testing for any significant differences based on certain demographic variables. The hypotheses were tested at 0.05 level of significance.

11. Findings This section presents the results obtained from data analysis. This was done in line with the already formulated hypotheses. Hypothesis 1: Social media usage for scholarly works by Nigerian Academics is not significantly different on the basis of Gender. Finding: Table 1 shows that there was significant gender difference in social media usage among Nigerian academics (t =2.37, df =348, P<.05). The Table shows that male academics use social media for scholarly works than their female counterparts. The hypothesis was therefore rejected. Table 1: t‐test summary table showing significant gender difference in social media usage for scholarly works among Nigerian ccademics Variables N Mean SD t‐value df Sig Male 105 35.63 8.34 0.033 Female 45 32.11 8.16 2.37 148

Rmk Sig

Decision Reject

P<.05 Hypothesis 2: There is no significant difference in Social media usage by the Nigerian Academics based on Age. Finding: Table 2 shows that there was significant difference in social media usage among Nigerian academics based on age (t =2.353, df =148, P<.05). It shows that younger academics that are less than 50 years of age use social media for scholarly works than older academics who are 50 years and above. The hypothesis was also therefore rejected. Table 2: t‐test Summary table showing significant difference in social media usage among Nigerian academics based on Age Variable Age N Mean SD t‐value df Sig Social Old(>50yrs) 50 32.63 8.16 0.026 Media Usage Young(<50yrs) 100 38.11 8.45 2.35 148

P<.05

318

Rmk Sig

Decision Reject

Maruff Akinwale Oladejo, Olajide Olawole Adelua and Nelson Aderemi Ige Hypothesis 3: Social media usage for scholarly works by the Nigerian College Academics is not significantly different on the basis of rank. Finding: Table 3 shows that there was no significant difference in social media usage among Nigerian academics on the basis of rank (t =.356, df =148, P>.05). It was observed that both the junior academics (those below the rank of Senior Lecturer cadre and the senior colleagues (those above Senior Lecturer cadre) made use of social media for scholarly works. The hypothesis was therefore retained. Table 3: t‐test summary table showing significant difference in social media usage among Nigerian academics on the basis of rank Variable Rank N Mean SD t‐value df Sig Social Senior (> SL) 55 32.12 8.18 0.124 Media Usage Junior (<SL) 95 34.53 8.34 .356 148

Rmk Not Sig

Decision Do Not Reject

P>.05 Hypothesis 4: Institutional affiliation has no significant difference in social media usage for scholarly works by Nigerian Academics. Finding: Table 4 shows that there was significant difference in social media usage among Nigerian academics based on institutional affiliation (t =3.09, df =148, P<.05). The table shows that University academics embrace the use of social media for scholarly works than their counterparts in Colleges. The hypothesis was therefore rejected. Table 4: t‐test summary table showing significant difference in social media usage for scholarly works among Nigerian academics based on institutional affiliation Variables N Mean SD t‐value df Sig University 85 35.63 8.54 0.034 College 65 32.11 8.26 3.09 148

Rmk Sig

Decision Reject

P<.05

12. Discussion of findings Finding from hypothesis one shows that there is significant gender difference in social media usage for scholarly works (t=2.37, df= 148, P <0.05). It therefore contradicts studies conducted by (Bart cited in Omotayo, 2010) that established no significant gender difference in social media usage for scholarly works, but supports (Pious cited in Oladejo, 2010)’s study that found a significant gender difference in social media usage for scholarly works. Male academics used social media for scholarly works more than their female counterparts. The rationale behind this finding might not be unconnected with the fact that male academics are not usually occupied with home demands which gives them enough time to work on the internet. They are also likely more efficacious and have positive attitude towards technology than their female counterparts. Also, there was significant difference in social media usage for scholarly works based on age (t=2.35, df= 148, P<0.05) in the present study. In fact, younger academics reported to have used social media usage for scholarly works more than the older ones. This might be due to the fact that the younger academics have acquired positive orientation about the importance of social media usage for scholarly works and are more technologically‐inclined. However, no significant difference was noticed in social media usage for scholarly works based on rank (t =.356, df =148, P>.05) though, academics below the Senior Lecturer rank appear better off. This is possible probably because academics above Senior Lecturer cadre might be dominated by younger academics who, as earlier remarked are likely to be more technologically‐inclined. Finally, there was significant difference in social media usage for scholarly works based on institutional affiliation (t=3.09, df= 148, P <0.05). Finding revealed that University academics used social media usage for scholarly works more than their counterparts in Colleges. This might not unconnected with the fact that Nigerian Universities are usually more funded than the Colleges, which might have made University academics more technologically‐inclined.

319

Maruff Akinwale Oladejo, Olajide Olawole Adelua and Nelson Aderemi Ige

13. Conclusion Social media usage for scholarly works has become an increasingly popular in higher education, especially in developed countries of the world due to advances in the Internet and multi‐media technologies. Social media usage is indispensable in the contemporary academic works. It has become a veritable source of current information for scholarly works in recent times. Scholarly works through social media usage will enable faculties to keep abreast of latest trends in their various disciplines. It therefore, becomes highly imperative for the Nigerian academics to embrace the use of social media usage for scholarly works with a view to improving upon their scholarly activities, and also be at par with their counterparts across the globe. This will in no small way, help academics in their research output and teaching activities.

14. Recommendations Based on the findings from the present study, it is hereby recommended as follows:

Nigerian academics, especially those in Colleges should be encouraged to have positive attitudes towards technology and consequently embrace the use of social media usage for scholarly works. They should also be positively self‐efficacious about technologies.

Institutional administrators should put in place, necessary motivational mechanisms such as giving free or subsidized laptops, iPads, and modems to the academics, organize regular training and re‐training workshops or seminars on internet usage for the academics. In addition, Institutional Management should ensure the availability of effective and efficient networked computers in all staff offices.

Government should inject more funds into the Colleges since these Colleges constitute an integral part of the nation’s higher education system.

References Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall. Boyd, D.M. and Ellison, N.B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 13, 210‐230. doi: 10.1111/j.1083‐6101.2007.00393.x Compeau, D. R., and Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self‐efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19, 189‐211. Kinzie, M. B., Delcourt, M. A. B., and Powers, S. M. (1994). Computer technologies: Attitudes and self‐efficacy across undergraduate disciplines. Research in Higher Education, 35, 745‐768. Khorrami‐Arani, O. (2001) Research Computer Self‐Efficacy. International Education Journal. Educational Research Conference Vol 2, No 4, Special Issue http://www.flinders.edu.au/education/iej Lenhart, A., Purcell, L., Smith, A., and Zickuhr, K. (2010). Social media and young adults. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved June 20, 2011, from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Social‐Media‐and‐Young‐ Adults.aspx Oladejo, M.A. (2010). A Path‐Analytic Study of Socio‐Psychological Variables and Distance Learners’ Academic Performance in Nigerian Universities. Doctoral Thesis, University of Ibadan, Nigeria. Oliver, T.A. and Shapiro, F. (1993) Self‐efficacy and computers. Journal of Computer Based Instruction, 20 (3), 81‐85. Omotayo, B. O. ( 2010). Access, Use, and Attitudes of Academics Toward Electronic Journals: A Case Study of Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile‐Ife,Nigeria. Pempek, T. A., Yermolayeva, Y. A., and Calvert, S. L. (2009). College students' social networking experiences on facebook. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30(3), 227‐238. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2008.12.010 Sam, H. K., Othman, A. E. A., and Nordin, Z. S. (2005). Computer Self‐Efficacy, Computer Anxiety, and Attitudes toward the Internet: A Study among Undergraduates in Unimas. Educational Technology & Society, 8 (4), 205‐219. Sponcil, M and Gitimu, P. (nd) Use of social media by college students: Relationship to communication and self‐concept. Journal of Technology Research Tufekci, Z. (2008). Grooming, gossip, facebook, and myspace. Information, Communication &Society, 11(4), 544‐ 564.doi:10.1080/13691180801999050

320

Utilizing Online Exams and Human Resources to Improve Student Learning and Minimizing Academic Dishonesty ‐ Finds From Large Section Deployment Timothy Olson Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA Olson704@umn.edu Abstract: Digital classrooms and online teaching have become pervasive throughout all levels of education. Online education in the classroom has changed the way teachers and students transfer, apply and demonstrate knowledge. This leads to the need to develop methods for online testing of students’ knowledge. On‐line testing presents many challenges in preventing academic dishonesty. This paper describes how online testing was utilized at a public university with large classes and lessons learned. With the growing popularity of digital textbooks and online courses, students have already or are poised to join the paradigm shift in education. When it comes to online testing some students have already made the leap. Numerous examples exist of students caught cheating on online examinations. Websites exist for students to share tips on cheating taking on‐line examinations. Technical and systematic tools are available in development to minimize or eliminate academic dishonesty. An on‐going debate in academia has been how far and fast to implement online examinations. This paper reviews how a large university course, already using a wiki to deliver content, successfully shifted from paper exams to all online testing. The course utilizes both technology and human resources to minimize or eliminate academic dishonesty. Some of the benefits realized in changing from paper exams to several online evaluations:

Eliminate unproductive time spent copying and grading exams

Exam metrics were available in real‐time

Eliminate human error in correcting

Elimination of paper

Students receive timely feedback

The grade book is updated in real time

Metrics available to identify exceptions

The benefits are substantial from balancing technology and a classroom environment to improve student examinations using on‐line capabilities. Students will be expecting exams to be tested online using their own devices. Educators need to be prepared. Keywords: academic dishonesty, on‐line exams, content management software (CMS), eTextbooks, software functionality, human element

1. Introduction Digital classrooms and online teaching have become pervasive throughout all levels of education. This leads to the need to develop methods for online testing of students’ knowledge. Online testing provides numerous benefits both for the student and instructor, but also presents many challenges in preventing academic dishonesty. This paper describes how online testing was utilized at a university with large classes and lessons learned over two semesters.

2. Overview Electronic textbooks, classroom wikis, and content management software (CMS) are just a few examples of the changing teaching environment rapidly becoming mainstream in all levels of education from primary school through universities all over the world (Nagel 2011). Online education in the classroom has changed the way teachers and students transfer, apply and demonstrate knowledge. South Korea’s Ministry of Science and Technology recently “announced that its entire curriculum will be available on computers, smartphones, and tablets by 2015, said an official from the Education Ministry. ‘That’s why Korean students, who are already fully prepared for digital society, need a paradigm shift in education’” (Van Kamp 2011). North American, European, and African educators are not far behind. Amazon is working with public school districts to eliminate physical textbooks, saving school districts millions of dollars. Digital textbooks offer a learning experience that boosts engagement, adapts to student

321

Timothy Olson learning, tracks performance, and ensures up‐to‐date content with the potential of significant cost savings. At the university course discussed in this paper, students have saved over the past five years in excess of one million dollars. These savings occurred by not having to buy a two hundred dollar textbook that could not be resold because the content was out of date within a year. According to a report from the Digital Textbook Collaborative, which was convened by the Federal Communication Commission and the US Department of Education, the one time cost of implementing the shift to digital varies from $250 to $1,000 per student per year, but the cost savings are estimated to be $600 per student per year (Heussner 2012). With the growing popularity of digital textbooks and online courses, students have already or are posed to join the paradigm shift in education. When it comes to online testing some students have already made the leap. “Tech‐savvy students are finding ways to cheat that let them ace online courses with minimal effort, in ways that are difficult to detect…. the issue of online cheating may rise in prominence, as more and more institutions embrace online courses. Yet as access improves, so will the number of students gaming the system, unless courses are designed carefully” (Young 2012). Numerous examples exist of students caught cheating on online examinations.

“Nearly 150 California schools could be in hot water after students took photos of state standardized tests and posted them on social networks, the Los Angeles Times reports.”

“A New York City public school junior was expelled after he was caught using his cell phone to take pictures of the state’s Regents exams and distribute test answers to over 50 classmates”. (Quan 2012)

Harvard, Almost half of the students in Government 1310, “Introduction to Congress,” are being investigated for plagiarizing, or “inappropriately collaborating,” on the course’s open‐book, open‐note, open‐Internet, take‐home final exam. (Petri 2012)

One student has gone so far as to create a website on how to cheat on college exams, (Rubenstein 2012)

3. Background An on‐going debate in academia has been how far and fast to implement online examinations. This paper will discuss how a required business school class, Introduction to Information Systems, at a large American public university successfully shifted from paper exams to all online testing. The course utilizes both technology and human resources to minimize or eliminate academic dishonesty. The fourteen week course changed from three paper exams to seven online exams. One goal of the shift to online exams was to improve the learning experience for students, with increased frequency of testing, shorter exams and faster feedback. Other goals included automated test correction; simplify the fixing of occasional errors in the answer key and most importantly, minimizing academic dishonesty. An unexpected benefit was the accessibility from a variety of devices (smart phones, tablets, PC’s) that students bring to class; nearly 100% of students provided their own device. At this public university the total enrollment exceeds 50,000 students and the business school has approximately 2,200 undergraduate students. All business school students must take seven required core courses. All of these core classes are scheduled in classrooms for 120 students. The MIS department’s core class always has 120 students registered per section with as many as five sections per semester. This environment poses a serious potential issue for academic dishonesty. Our school, like every other university, takes the issue of academic dishonesty very seriously. We actually poll our undergraduate students annually to assess the degree of academic dishonesty observed by students. In the past when using paper exams in combination with the close proximity of students, issues arose with the opportunity to copy another student’s exam. To combat copying of answers, several different methods of were tried such as, multiple paper colors, separate versions with different order of questions, changing questions, etc. It seemed every way we tried to minimize students cheating added significant complexity and time preparing and grading the large number of exams. The course made use of open source education CMS provided by the university. The software application provided functionality designed to minimize or make if difficult for students to cheat. With the number of exams and hundreds of students per semester, using multiple choice questions was our chosen method of type of exam. The approach was twofold, use delivered software functionality and take nontechnical steps to minimize or eliminate academic dishonesty.

322

Timothy Olson A recent research paper addressed the topic of Academic Honesty and Online Courses. Academic dishonesty is issue of concern for teachers, students, and institutions of higher education Grijalva, T., Kerkvliet, J. Nowell, C.). Studies consistently show that a significant number of students cheat in college, (Michaels and Miethe 1989; Whitley, 1998; Brown and Emmett, 2001). Currently, statistical evidence on academic dishonesty in online courses is nonexistent, but some claim that because students and faculty do not interact directly in such classes, online classes will invite more cheating than traditional classes. While we can probably all agree that cheating in online courses is easier to pull off than in a physical classroom …based on our research, From the recent book “Sampling the Cheating Life”, by Dan Ariely, “the author would propose that the primary reason is the increased psychological distance between the dishonest act and its significance, and between teacher and student. The difference a little distance can make is rather impressive” (Ariely 2012). From this research educators can not expect technology to deal with the variety of methods students have been known to use to cheat on exams. In classroom online exams can actually minimize cheating if the software is configured correctly and exams are conducted in a supervised manner. Also in the very few incidents when students were caught cheating the evidence was indisputable.

4. Large scale deployment In the Spring Semester of 2012 the first online test was conducted with four sections totaling 480 students. In preparing for this first exam hardware and software assumptions and strategy were reviewed with supporting school departments including infrastructure, wireless networks and application. For the first exam, students were told that the test was to be done individually within a twenty‐four period outside of class. The software was configured to allow for only one attempt, once students logged on the exam could not be stopped and restarted, twenty five multiple choice questions; with a thirty minute time limit. Upon students completing the examination, the resulting data was analyzed in a number of different ways. The average and median scores were as expected; the Length of time to complete was also reviewed. What was very interesting is ten students were able to finish the exam in less than four minutes and three got done in a little over two minutes. Now the multiple choice questions are written in such a way that students have to think through both questions and answers thoroughly (no definitions, or simple process of elimination), using Bloom’s higher levels of learning. The ten students who were able to finish in four minutes or less were asked to see the instructor. What was discovered in meeting with the students is that they worked in teams one student would take the exam while the others shared their collective knowledge and / or resources. By the time the last team member had taken the exam they had seen all the questions, knew the answers and were able to finish in just a few minutes. This made it clear giving online exams to students outside of the classroom was problematic for academic dishonesty. Our concerns regarding cheating on the online exams focused on three areas:

Requiring students to be in the classroom to take the exam, this is to prevent students from taking the exam in an unrestricted environment or collaborating with other students and resources, planned cheating.

Prevent students from gaining any advantage at looking at someone else’s exam during the test, panic cheating.

Copying the exam to share with other students, with several sections of the same course this can easily become an issue.

The educational content management software offered by the university has several features which are designed to minimize cheating. The instructor has to select, test and implement the delivered functionality. The functionality selected to use follows:

Utilize a bank of question, 40 to 50 were recommended for a 25 question exam

Scramble the order of questions

Scramble the order of answers for each question

Require a password to start the exam

Lockdown the browser

Utilize the Java security

323

Timothy Olson These features provide security by requiring students to be in the classroom to take the exam along with a password written on the whiteboard in the classroom. This deals with students planning to cheat by not attending class but taking the exam during the open testing period. The software does not allow students to copy the exam, preventing students from distributing the exam to other students. This approach addresses students planning to cheat. By using a bank of questions, scrambling the questions and scrambling the answers students will find it extremely difficult, if not impossible to copy, or look at someone else’s exam and find the same question / answer during the test. This approach deals with the “panic” type of cheating. By using the Lockdown browser software functionality we can prevent students from having multiple sessions / windows open providing access to other resources available on the computer. As already identified several of the security features of the educational content management software application were utilized. In addition a few physical or situational hurdles were implemented. The log‐in password would be written on the whiteboard in class. The last question was not graded but the answer was written on the board only after the testing period had started. (What color is written on the board in class?). Phones cannot be on in class. We have two proctors and the instructor walking around the room to monitor student activities. A recent study on exams reports three principal findings, one discusses the use of proctors in the classroom. … On proctoring and the frequency of cheating on essay exams and multiple choice exams, it is reported that “roughly half of the respondents perceive un‐proctored assessments as having greater cheating risk than the same assessment in a proctored format. …These findings are consistent with the conventional perception that in a side by side comparison of two courses with comparable content and predominately multiple choice exam assessments, the course with un‐proctored exams is viewed as having greater cheating risk” (Hamon, Lambrinos, Buffolino 2010).

5. Benefits Numerous benefits were realized in changing from fewer paper exams to several online evaluations. The benefits could be divided between faculty, with improvements in productivity and quality, and student assessment. Instructor benefits included:

Eliminate unproductive time spent copying and grading exams

Exam metrics were available in real‐time in a user friendly format for analysis

Able to provide seven exams in a fourteen week semester

Eliminate human error in correcting

Ease of updating answer key

Reduction in the amount of paper, thousands of sheets per semester

Metrics available to identify exceptions in:

IP Addresses network identification

Missed security answer, passwords

Length of time

High percentage questions (right or wrong)

Student realized benefits included:

Eliminate students forgetting to write their name or illegible handwriting

Students receive timely feedback after the examination is closed.

The grade book is updated in real time.

No additional costs, utilized existing resources

324

Timothy Olson

6. Model for minimizing cheating using on‐line examinations The course has two types of exams: individual and group. All exams are twenty‐five multiple choice questions written in a critical thinking style. From past experience academic dishonesty has not been an issue with group exams. Individual exams are of the greatest concern for cheating. Using software features already described, in‐classroom information, along with close test supervision has created a model that fulfills our original goals. Students are told before the exam to restart their computers and to only log into the course website. Once the exam is accessed the educational CMS is configured to lockdown their computer’s browser. Each section of the course has two peer assistants that proctor along with the instructor. Pryor said the most common way students cheat in online courses is by telling professors their exam froze. (Khuder 2011). Quite often this does happen to student's losing wireless connection, not the testing software. The majority of times all the students have to do is to restart the exam session on their computer. In addition CMS saves the portion of the exam completed, accessible by the instructor. After the last class section completes the exam, scores are made visible for students and posted to the grade book. The software provides metrics by individual, question, class, exam, etc. As an example, network IP Addresses are reviewed to identify students accessing the exam outside of the universities’ networks. The following is an example finding from reviewing data after an exam. IPAddresses were reviewed after two individual exams with over 700 students. Out of the 700 students, seven were identified with IPAddresses outside of the university. Research found five of the seven addresses were from telecommunication internet service providers. However the two remaining IP Addresses were curious. One was from a nearby apartment complex and another from a local residential suburb. Next the two student’s exams with the curious IP Addresses were reviewed, both password and final answers originating from the classroom were correct. Both students were asked if they could explain the IP Addresses and both immediately confessed that someone in the classroom texted them the password and answer to the last question. This example was shared with all the students as a learning / teaching opportunity.

7. Conclusion Pryor said it is best for students to take more important exams on campus where they can be monitored (Young 2012). By using available software applications for online testing, combined with proctors and instructors present in the classroom, technology can improve the learning experience for students, reduce cost and environmental impact, increase value‐add time (exam preparation), decrease unproductive time (grading exams), provide metrics to improve the examination experience, and decrease academic dishonesty. The benefits are substantial; students either are or will be shortly expecting exams to be delivered exclusively online. Educators need to be prepared. Online examinations are just one facet of the experience, but potentially the most important.

References Ariely, D. (2012) Cheating‐in‐online‐courses, August 2012, /http://www.independentcollegian.com/faculty‐concerned‐ with‐cheating‐in‐online‐classes‐1.2660515#.UHwoCFFxh‐Y Grijalva, T., Kerkvliet, J. Nowell, C. Academic Honesty and Online Courses, August 2007, ugs.usf.edu/pdf/courses/0708/cheat%20online%20pap.pdf Hamon, O. and Lambrinos, J. and Buffolino, J. (2010), Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, Volume XIII, Number III, Page 74, Fall 2010 University of West Georgia Heussner, K. (2012) In digital textbook transition device availability is just the beginning, October 2012, http://gigaom.com Khuder, S. (2011) Faculty concerned with cheating in online, October 2011, http://www.independentcollegian.com/classes Nagel, D.(2011) K‐12 to see double digit growth in e‐learning through 2015, July 2011, http://thejournal.com/articles Petri, A. (2012) The Harvard cheating scandal and the end of failure, September 2012, http://www.washingtonpost.com Quan, H. (2012) California Test Cheating: Schools Could Face Penalties After Students Take Photos Of Standardized Exams, July 2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com Rubenstein, B.(2012) www.wikihow.com/Cheat‐On‐a‐Test, December 2012 Van Camp, J. (2012) South Korean school textbooks will be all digital by 2015, August 2012, http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile Young, J. (2012) Online classes see cheating goes high‐tech, June 2012, http://chronicle.com/article

325

JiFUNzeni: A Blended Learning Approach for Sustainable Teachers’ Professional Development Brown Onguko Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development ‐ East Africa, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania brown.onguko@aku.edu Abstract: JiFUNzeni blended learning approach is a sustainable approach to provision of professional development (PD) for those in challenging educational contexts. JiFUNzeni approach emphasizes training regional experts to create blended learning content, working with appropriate technology while building content repositories. JiFUNzeni approach was field tested though a design‐based research intervention conducted in rural western Kenya. The field test included design, development and implementation of a blended learning course for teachers’ professional development utilizing appropriate technologies including tablets powered by solar energy, open educational resources and open source software. One year after the intervention, there were follow‐up interviews conducted with eight of the ten teachers and two PDTs who participated in the research. The findings from the follow‐up interviews shared in this paper revealed that: teachers still used cooperative learning and activity‐based learning strategies in their teaching. The PDTs on the other hand designed, developed and implemented one other jiFUNzeni blended learning course for twelve teachers in one school in Korogocho in Nairobi city. Implementation by PDTs of jiFUNzeni approach confirmed that they had learned through a sustainable way of delivering professional development in challenging educational contexts. The PDTs utilized the instructional design approaches learned through their participation in the research in designing blended learning content, while they also innovated new ways of developing self‐study content as an important creative addition to what they had previously learned. Two teenage children participated in digital content development by advising the PDTs on more efficient ways of applying technology attesting to the fact that digital natives are important reciprocal supporters to digital immigrants and vice versa. Keywords: blended learning, challenging educational context, jiFUNzeni approach, open educational resources

1. Introduction This paper presents findings on sustainability of one tested innovative way of delivering professional development for teachers in challenging educational contexts. While blended learning to enable teacher’s access professional development has been utilized in many contexts, jiFUNzeni blended learning approach which is the focus of this paper lays emphasis on creating locally relevant content and use of appropriate technology including offline web content, open educational resources (OERs) and solar energy solutions. This blended learning approach is explained in detail after the background section in which the key themes in this paper are presented. The key themes are: blended learning and appropriate technology, professional development and challenging educational contexts.

2. Background The key themes in this paper are presented as background to clarify and ground the themes within available literature as reviewed for this paper. First, clarification of blended learning and appropriate technology is the focus of the following subsection.

2.1 Blended learning and appropriate technology Scholars have defined blended learning variously. Picciano (2009) defined blended learning as a combination of online learning and face‐to‐face instruction. Other scholars such as Garrison and Vaughan (2008) delineate the components of blended learning stating that it is the fusion of online learning and face‐to‐face delivery of learning. These definitions of blended learning from the Western perspective are influenced by realities of the context in the west. Such realities include: abundant electricity, Internet connectivity, and access to powerful technologies such as computers and tablets. Thus for scholars from the West, it is quite in order to emphasize access to online experience when defining blended learning. Defining and implementing blended learning from a challenging context such as rural Kenya, where jiFUNzeni field test was conducted calls for consideration of the contextual realities as well. Thus in a context where there is lack of access to electricity, Internet is not guaranteed, and schools lack basic amenities including clean and safe learning spaces, learning materials such as text books and facilities such as desks, blended learning

326

Brown Onguko must be redefined with consideration of the contextual realities. Thus such contexts are characterized as challenging educational contexts in this paper. Some scholars in Kenya have written about blended learning with reference to contextual realities, although they do not define it. Gunga and Ricketts (2007) while acknowledging virtual learning as implemented at Kenyatta University through the African Virtual University (AVU), suggested that a blended approach was more ideal because the Kenyan context was not ready for only virtual offering of AVU programs as had been expected, hence face‐to‐face components were later included. Simiyu and Macharia (2008) suggested that at Moi University, on recognizing the need to include teachers in their degree programs, blended learning approaches had to be utilized. These scholars suggested that the “blend” at Moi University consisted of face‐ to‐face instruction to teachers, combined with online access to course content via communication tools such as email or discussion forums. These two examples of blended learning in Kenya, however do not clarify what blended learning might be defined as. In this paper, blended learning is defined as a deliberate combination of self‐directed study of offline content deployed on tablets, with occasional face‐to‐face meetings, moderated through instructor‐led sessions. This definition takes into consideration access to offline PD content on tablets combined with teachers’ face‐to‐ face interactions with their peers and PDTs. JiFUNzeni blended learning approach emphasizes use of appropriate technologies for each context. Appropriate technology was coined and extensively used by Schumacher (1973). Schumacher identified the characteristics of appropriate technology as (a) simple, (b) small scale, (c) low cost, and (d) non‐violent. The United States Office of Technology Assessment further refined the definition of appropriate technology as: (a) small scale, (b) energy efficient, (c) environmentally sound, (d) labor intensive, (e) controlled by the local community, and (f) sustained at the local level (Wicklein, 2005). Sustainability at the local level has been qualified by Batteau as: “Appropriate technologies are ‘appropriatable’ technologies – devices and implements with which users can establish up‐close and familiar relationships, so that mastering them no longer seems to be an insurmountable feat” (2010, p. 132). Appropriate technology in the research in this paper refers to those technologies which are simple, small scale, easily connect with the local users and cultures; are sustainable within the local economic circumstances, and inexpensive (Wicklein, 2005). From a general perspective, Batteau asserted that examples of appropriate technologies may include bicycle‐driven water pumps for arid regions lacking reliable electric supply or hand‐ cranked radios that never need to have their batteries replaced. They also include minimally featured cell phones that are more reliable than landline telephones in many challenging contexts (Batteau, 2010). In this paper, examples of appropriate technologies include inexpensive tablets, solar energy, mobile phones and open educational resources (OERs). Notably, with the expansion of use of social media, tools such as Facebook, Twitter and online blogs are emerging as important tools for learning in challenging contexts. These applications, available on platforms such as mobile phones necessitate a review of online learning due to the affordances for learning on social media. Such appropriate technologies will be helpful in providing professional development, which is briefly reviewed in the following section.

2.2 Professional development Professional development provides teachers with opportunities to reach beyond their current professional repertoire (Joyce, 2004). According to Joyce, teachers are wonderful learners who, when given just a few days of high quality professional development, can enhance their performance and make huge differences for their students. Joyce suggested teachers need help to make changes in their practice in curriculum, instruction and assessing student learning. The help envisioned by Joyce focused on professional development providers availing themselves as working colleagues to inquire with teams of teachers, becoming part of, rather than professional development ‘presenters’ (Joyce, 2004). This implies that professional development providers can no longer claim to be the ones who know and have to present to teachers, but rather consistent with blended learning, there should be opportunity for teachers to take charge of their learning through self‐directed study and exchange of ideas in face‐so‐face sessions.

327

Brown Onguko The Kenyan education authorities recognize the importance of professional development as a potential contributor to change in teaching practice. The Kenyan Ministry of Education identified in‐service education for primary teachers as an important component of the comprehensive investment program in education for the period 2005 – 2010 (Akyeampong, et al. 2011). However, although Kenya has an elaborate professional development infrastructure, not much has been done to institutionalize professional development. Instead teachers’ professional development in Kenya consists of “small usually one shot projects by a variety of NGOs whose focus is usually dictated by the area of interest to the particular NGO” (Akyeampong, et al. 2011, p. 52). The country’s educational aspirations cannot be realized with such unstructured and uncoordinated implementation of PD. Researching alternative ways of delivery of PD such as jiFUNzeni approach could contribute towards institutionalization of PD in such challenging educational contexts, a term which is elaborated in the following section.

2.3 Challenging educational contexts It is suggested that there is a range of contextual circumstances inherent in educational contexts like the one in the study reported in this paper that would be characterized as challenging educational contexts. While it is acknowledged that there does not appear to be a commonly held definition of the term challenging contexts, there seems to be some consensus that they are associated with contexts with high poverty levels (Chapman and Harris, 2004). Harris (2002) writing on school leadership in schools that might be characterized as challenging contexts, interchangeably used the terms: schools in difficult circumstances, schools in difficult and challenging contexts, schools facing difficult circumstances, and difficult school contexts. The mixture of terms describing schools in similar situations can be very confusing. Harris (2002) pointed to the United Kingdom’s Department for Education and Skills (DfES) designation of ‘schools facing challenging circumstances’ as those in which, among other circumstances, 35% of the students receive free meals, those schools with falling enrolment numbers and those serving inner city communities. The characteristics enumerated in the DfES categorization imply links to high poverty as a condition for designation of ‘schools facing challenging circumstances’. Challenging educational contexts can be defined as environmental, social, and infrastructural impacts that prevent individuals from reaching their potential and participating in both formal and informal learning (Crichton and Onguko, in press). The constraints that characterize challenging contexts referred to in this paper include

lack of universal access to formal learning;

threats to access to learning activities due to cultural or religious reasons;

lack of access to electricity;

lack of clean water and sanitation services;

lack of access to reliable, unfiltered or censored Internet; and

other access limitations linked directly to poverty (health, fees, low wages, inappropriate clothing, etc.).

The list of constraints above is not exhaustive, yet it suggests the types of challenges faced by learners and educators, including the participants in the study in this paper. The conditions enumerated above are common in many developing countries, thus calling for interventions that recognize the need to address the constraints through deployment of appropriate technologies that take into account the contextual realities. An intervention guided by the activity theory such as jiFUNzeni blended learning approach can enable alleviation of some of the challenges since teachers are able to articulate their needs; motivated to address the needs through active engagement, social interaction and collaborative effort. JiFUNzeni approach is explained in detail in the following section.

3. JiFUNzeni blended learning approach JiFUNzeni approach was initially proposed by our team of scholars and innovators as a conceptual framework for making professional development accessible to over one billion people living off the electricity grid (Jifunzeni, 2010). Jifunzeni is a Kiswahili word that means inviting all to learn. This approach emphasizes working collaboratively with regional partners, to develop digital content relevant to the context. JiFUNzeni

328

Brown Onguko approach underscores a needs‐based implementation of blended learning for professional development, delivered on appropriate technologies (Onguko, 2012). There are four components in jiFUNzeni approach. These components are

content development;

appropriate hardware solutions;

training; and

access to a content repository.

The four components of jiFUNzeni approach are illustrated in Figure 1. These components include creating digital blended learning resources as PDF readings, video clips, audio podcasts, and pictorial images that are either embedded in HTML content or electronically published (epub) content. Thus jiFUNzeni blended learning is a simple way to digitally tell, watch a pamphlet, read information, and build instructional capacity through the thoughtful development and delivery of relevant content, enabled by appropriate technologies (Crichton and Onguko, in press). Selection of appropriate technology for each context is an important component in this framework. Training of regional teachers as providers of innovative learning content through blended learning is one of the core components of jiFUNzeni approach. The content developed through jiFUNzeni initiatives will continue to be made available to other users as open educational resources on a content repository hosted at www.jifunzeni.com.

Figure 1: Components of jiFUNzeni approach (Source: www.jifunzeni.com) Initially jiFUNzeni blended learning approach was a theoretical proposition that required to be tested in the real world where solutions to professional development needs were required. In summer 2010, jiFUNzeni approach was piloted with six teachers in Nairobi, Kenya to establish whether jiFUNzeni as a theoretical proposition could be implemented in practice in an urban context before actual deployment in a rural setting without electricity. After the success realized through the pilot, jiFUNzeni was then deployed for field test in rural western Kenya, which is the focus of the research in this paper. JiFUNzeni approach is grounded in activity theory (Engestrom, 1987) complemented by self‐directed theory of adult learning (Merriam, 2001) and situated learning theory (Lave and Wenger, 1991). Activity theory provides for a needs driven and goal directed process through tool mediation, and entails division of labor and isolation of partial tasks implemented by participants in a community of relationships. Key features of activity theory are active engagement and social interaction, which was the basis for teachers during field test of jiFUNzeni approach to collaboratively work with each other, studying through appropriate technologies to inform their teaching practices. Situating the field test within their work‐context enabled teachers to implement teaching strategies they studied in the content i.e. cooperative learning and activity‐based learning.

329

Brown Onguko

4. Research methodology The research in this paper used qualitative research specifically design‐based research paradigm. In doing design‐based research according to Walker (2006), a researcher’s rigorous analysis of a learning problem leads to specific ideas for intervention. “Designers then build systems that use information technology to build specific teaching and learning materials and methods designed to realize learning gains predicted by theory and research (Walker, 2006, p. 11). Walker suggested that if the theoretical analysis is right then these interventions ought to give markedly more effective results. Thus, it has been argued, literature on design research is unanimous that the goal is useful innovation with particular emphasis on investigating the possibilities for educational improvement by bringing about new forms of learning in order to study them (Schwartz, Chang and Martin, 2008). Thus jiFUNzeni blended learning as a theoretical proposition was actualized through design based research reported in this paper. The data in this paper was mainly drawn from interviews with the participants and documentation of design artifacts. Interviews with teachers and PDTs, led to narratives as an important segment of the data. Follow‐up interviews conducted one year after the initial field test of jiFUNzeni approach and documented design artifacts of a second intervention implemented by the PDTs in Korogocho in Nairobi are the sources of data shared in the paper. Design artifacts were documented by the PDTs during design and implementation of PD. Documentation of design artifacts is a means of providing insights into the ‘making of’ the design (Kelly, Lesh and Baek, 2008). Kelly, et al. explain that the process “involves not simply sharing the designed artifact, but providing rich descriptions of the context, guiding and emerging theory, design features of the intervention and the impact of these features on participation and learning” (2008, p. 13). The PDTs documented the design artifacts some of which are shared in Figures 1 and 2 in this paper. Following the brief presentation of research methods, the data is presented in the following section.

5. Presentation of results The results discussed in this section are drawn from data gathered one year after jiFUNzeni field test, with a view to getting evidence of the potential for sustainability of jiFUNzeni blended learning approach. The results are presented at two levels: first, findings from interviews with PDT’s on design and implementation of jiFUNzeni blended learning in Korogocho in the city of Nairobi; and secondly follow‐up interviews with eight teachers’ one year after jiFUNzeni field test in rural western Kenya.

5.1 PDTs’ Design and implementation of blended learning Two PDTs who had learned through jiFUNzeni field test retained the appropriate technologies including tablets, solar charging equipment and flip camera for their use in designing and implementing other blended learning programs for teachers' professional development. They subsequently worked with twelve teachers in one school in Korogocho slum of Nairobi to implement one blended learning course on assessment of learning. Findings from interviews with them are shared in the following subsection. JiFUNzeni approach in Korogocho At interviews with PDTs, they stated that they learned through jiFUNzeni field test research and thus designed and implemented jiFUNzeni approach without the support of the researcher. Commenting on their experiences in blended learning, PDT1 said: Starting with the design, it was tough. Tough because, you see the previous year we were together [with researcher] and therefore if there was a little problem we had someone to troubleshoot. When we got a problem, we had to sit back and ask ourselves, ok! So where do we go from here? What do we do? And for that reason it took us slightly longer to write the program, design it. But for me the joy was, it is true I did learn because even without having someone to fall on back immediately, in this case, to fall back on you [researcher] and ask what do we do now? We still were able to go on and do the design and in fact learn new ways; some short cuts to what we did (Interview).

330

Brown Onguko Further discussion with the PDTs on creation of multimedia content revealed that their two teenage children guided them on use of the tools at their disposal for creating content. They called the two children "digital natives" based on the concept of digital natives popularized by Prensky (2001). PDT2 stated, “We had the phone, then we also realized that we could use the laptop for audio recording. In fact the laptop [use for audio recording] we were reminded by the digital natives” (Interview). PDT1 clarified “The natives are my daughter and my colleague’s son” (Interview). The “digital natives’ contributed to efficiency in application of technology. PDT2 articulated the role of the teenagers as: What they did, we came up with a story board and we thought the part you [researcher] played when we recorded the audio content needed another voice, so we used Jay’s voice to role‐play some parts like the introduction. And then Penny was the one who was handling the gadgets. So there was division of labor. And they were the ones who reminded us we could use Bluetooth to transfer [multimedia files]. Like when we had finished [compiling] the course, we were going to export from one laptop to the other. We were thinking of using email. So we were busy looking for email, connecting to the Internet to email to each other then the two of them laughed and said what are you people talking about. These laptops have Bluetooth! (Interview). Further discussion with the PDTs revealed that the ‘digital natives’ contributed more to content creation. As indicated by PDT1 in this excerpt: Even when recording audio, we tried the telephone and it was not working. Then they said, if it is not working, use the laptop. The laptop has a recorder why don’t we just try that. And you know when you imagine that this is an 18 year old and a 13 year old guiding us, then we truly could say these are digital natives (Interview). The blended learning content designed by the PDTs is evident in the screenshot in Figure 2. It was heartening to realize that PDTs referred to division of labor when talking about their role and that played by the ‘digital natives’ because in jiFUNzeni field test, division of labor was an important component together with development of a community as in activity theory (Engestrom 1987) which is an important guide for the jiFUNzeni blended learning approach.

Figure 2: Screenshot of offline web content PDTs discovered new ways of developing multimedia content apart from the initial processes during the field test of jiFUNzeni learning approach: On downloading videos from YouTube, we did not go through the process we had gone through earlier. We went to Edutopia site and it was clearly advocated that we could use their resources

331

Brown Onguko and share or use their material for educational purposes. The YouTube videos just downloaded automatically (Interview, PDT2). The explanation on free access to web content from Edutopia site was important at this juncture because in the initial field test of jiFUNzeni, we had to seek for permission to use content from Latika Roy Foundation in India via email. Access to open content that could be repurposed for each context is an important part of jiFUNzeni approach as it is proposed for challenging educational contexts that lack educational resources among other challenges. On implementation of jiFUNzeni approach in Korogocho, the PDTs expressed their satisfaction in the interview: The theme of our course was assessment. We had previously had a one‐day workshop with the teachers and they had requested us to talk about assessment. We designed a course that would take six weeks and we had three units. When we met the teachers on the first face‐to‐face, we had to introduce them to the technologies including how to use them. The school had electricity, which they used to recharge the tablets. (Interview, PDT2). Clearly PDTs had changed their delivery of PD from entirely face‐to‐face offering to blended mode as suggested above. It is noted here that the teachers had requested them to “talk” about assessment, but then PDTs went to the teachers with more resources in various formats than just their “talking” to them. PDT2 described the processes and the activities they engaged in. We requested the teachers to allow us to visit them in their classrooms for observation just to see if they were able to implement the content they were reading, in their teaching. At least we saw each and every teacher in their classrooms, some of them even three times. The teachers were drawn from a whole range of sections from baby class to grade seven, which was the highest grade (Interview). The content provided by the PDTs spoke to teachers through the audio and video content, teachers read content through self‐directed study as in the quote above rather than PDTs being the only ones “talking” to teachers. PDT1 explained the value of blended learning to teachers from a general perspective. One of the things we have done before are workshops with teachers. In those workshops, we just relied on face‐to‐face and they would come where we are. One of the successes of blended learning is that it allows the teacher to remain in the classroom yet at the same time be able to do professional development. We tried to gather some data about these teachers. Majority of them had not accessed PD before. When we asked them why, they said that with the work they have, it is not easy for them to go out for professional development because they have a lot of work in school, they have responsibilities at home and it is also expensive. So by doing blended learning you allow that teacher not to withdraw from the classroom yet at the same time to get opportunity to grow as a teacher through professional development (Interview). The interview with PDTs on design and implementation of jiFUNzeni approach on their own, in a different context from the field test site suggests they quickly learned through their involvement in field test. These are hallmarks of a sustainable approach to provision of PD in such challenging educational contexts. Figure 3 is evidence of offline content on the tablet used for self‐directed study.

Figure 3: The tablet used by teachers for self‐directed study

332

Brown Onguko In the following section, data from teachers’ interviews is presented. Teachers’ views during follow‐up interviews Eight of ten teachers who participated in jiFUNzeni field test in western Kenya were still teaching in the research school when the follow‐up interviews were conducted. The objective of the interviews was to establish whether one year after the intervention, teachers still applied teaching strategies learned through jiFUNzeni approach. This was in a bid to identify whether indeed jiFUNzeni can be a sustainable approach to providing professional development in a challenging context. It was not, however, possible to observe teachers applying the teaching strategies because the researcher’s visit coincided with the examinations period just before school holidays at end of term two of 2012. The eight teachers responded to the follow‐up interview questions. When asked whether they still used the teaching strategies they had learned a year earlier, Nita responded, “Yeah! We still use especially group work. I even have some books here I am marking arising from work done by my students in groups” (Interview). This response implied teachers continue to apply cooperative learning, which was one of the teaching strategies introduced to them through jiFUNzeni approach. Asked if they could remember what the teaching strategies they learned one year earlier were, Churchill stated: “I remember we looked at different approaches to teaching and learning, specifically cooperative learning and activity‐based learning such that the children interacted and learned from each other” (Interview). When asked how the strategies were helpful in their teaching, Churchill observed: These were very helpful because use of cooperative learning enabled the teacher to ease the burden of being the sole presenter and were able to engage the learners. Learning became participatory; there was peer‐learning and sharing for example, through use of round‐robin approach (Interview). On responding to the same question, Loise stated, “through the use of teaching and learning aids (learning materials) the learners were able to manipulate some of the materials and this helped in their remembering of what was learned in class” (Interview).The responses by teachers suggest that they continued to engage students as active participants in learning as opposed to the passive participation students were exposed to before the intervention. Mika also followed up in responding to the same question emphasizing: With the approaches we were able to engage the learners and make learning real. When we use examples we make learning abstract but now using the approaches we make use of locally available materials all found within the school and make learning real (Interview). Mika’s response suggests that by teachers engaging their students in cooperative learning and activity‐based learning, they enabled the students to engage in learning by doing, thus "making learning real". Another question was on the successes the teachers had had so far in using the teaching strategies. On this, Nita stated: In a nutshell there is some achievement, for example, you will give them an assignment. When they work individually, they don’t score as high as when you allow them to discuss freely then they come to a conclusion. So you find that when they work as a group the scores are high because many heads are brought together, they share ideas before they come to a conclusion. They go to the extent of having to appoint a chairperson to control the discussion, a secretary to write. At least they develop self‐esteem to work (Interview). Nita’s response not only suggests that students learn better when they engage in discussions and doing activities with others, but also that they gain by taking on responsibilities such as leading in the cooperative groups. On challenges encountered in using the teaching strategies introduced to them through the research, Emah stated:

333

Brown Onguko On the use of the materials, sometimes you find that you have to purchase these materials. Some of those locally available are not very good; are not very reliable, you need to purchase them and yet we lack the resources (Interview). Teachers were also asked to share the surprises encountered in implementing teaching strategies over the year. Nita stated, “There are some surprises. Just the other day, Loise was complaining that parents couldn’t give a spoonful of sugar and salt when it came to mixing in science. So we get surprised because the parents are not supportive”. On the same issue, Loise stated: We also need support. You see when a teacher requests for a tea‐spoon (of sugar) from every child, at the end of the day parents think you are collecting sugar for use in school. They even don’t see the need. After all they understand that we have free primary education in Kenya so nothing should come from them. The parents think if you get a spoon of sugar or salt from every child, then you have so much sugar or salt. If you tell them: ok I want everybody to contribute a shilling we buy the items, you know even getting that shilling is very hard (Interview). The responses by Nita and Loise suggest a need to sensitize the parents and school community members on their support responsibilities for the teaching and learning process. For schools in challenging educational contexts like the ones in this paper, it is always a problem to find learning material. Contribution by the parents towards learning resources like sugar as mentioned in the excerpts is crucial for authentic and practical learning. Otherwise learning remains abstract. A detailed discussion of the findings follows in the next section.

6. Discussion Data gathered in interviews one year after jiFUNzeni field test led to the results presented in the previous section. The study revealed that for the PDTs who already offered school‐based face‐to‐face professional development to fellow teachers, it was easier to improve on delivery of PD moving to blended delivery. PDTs in the study first engaged in a two weeks usability test of jiFUNzeni approach, then together with the researcher designed and implemented the field test of jiFUNzeni approach and were subsequently ready to implement one such blended learning course with teachers in a school in Korogocho on their own. This attests to the need to empower teachers in challenging contexts to enable them utilize appropriate technologies in providing professional development to their colleagues. Lessons so far learned from implementation of jiFUNzeni approach in two sites point to the importance of contextual realities. It is clear that each context presents variations in terms of infrastructural and professional development needs. For example, in the rural context of western Kenya where electricity was not available, jiFUNzeni approach was implemented with power harvested from solar energy. However, when implementing the second jiFUNzeni blended offering in Korogocho in Nairobi, teachers had access to electricity. While the same tablets were used in both sites, the power options differed on the basis of the contextual realities. This reiterates the importance of considering the jiFUNzeni components, which emphasize training local experts while selecting the most appropriate technology options. In terms of professional development, the teachers in rural western Kenya were in need of PD on teaching large class sizes while teachers in Korogocho needed PD on assessment. These were outcomes of the needs assessment done before the interventions at both sites. An important addition to jiFUNzeni approach by the PDTs realized through the offering in Korogocho was involvement of teenage children referred to as digital natives in this paper in instructional design. While they did not contribute towards generating content, the teenage children were however, very instrumental in supporting PDTs in terms of technology stewardship. The digital natives who are so‐called because they were born in times when the current high levels of digital technology in society was already upon us, speaks to the reality that teachers and parents have no choice but to also learn from the younger generations. The quality of the course was definitely boosted by involvement of the teenagers, as PDTs readily accepted and indeed learned from their input. Teachers and parents no longer have monopoly of knowledge and skills arising either from experience or training. Young children are able to share their knowledge and skills owing to the times in which they live. For the interviews conducted with teachers one year after jiFUNzeni field test in rural western Kenya, it was apparent that the teachers learned important teaching strategies, which they continue to use in their

334

Brown Onguko classrooms. Teachers' responses at interviews indicated that they continued to use cooperative learning and activity‐based learning strategies one year after the research. I argue that providing PD for teachers in work‐ based environments in their schools and classrooms has an advantage of providing real‐life experiences that can last longer in their practice. If teachers were engaged in PD on activity‐based learning and cooperative learning strategies in a traditional professional development session where PDTs invite teachers to “talk” to them in a face‐to‐face course away from their schools, implementation in classrooms would have been difficult. The findings in this paper confirmed that jiFUNzeni, which was initially presented as a theoretical proposition was actualized in practice as evident from the two sites where it has been implemented. Scale up of jiFUNzeni blended learning approach is the next step of action as we are proposing to establish JiFUNzeni Innovative Learning Centre (JILC) at our university. The proposed JILC will act as an incubator for best practice in applying appropriate technologies in teaching and learning in challenging educational contexts. This is a task we look forward to with a lot of enthusiasm.

7. Conclusion This paper has illuminated the background to jiFUNzeni blended learning approach, data arising from its implementation and its potential for sustainability. Challenging educational contexts like the ones described in this paper i.e. rural schools and schools in slum areas in cities, require specific contextually relevant and driven interventions such as jiFUNzeni blended learning approach. It is gratifying to me to note that jiFUNzeni blended learning approach; a theoretical proposition has been able to take hold in practice in the challenging educational contexts it has been implemented. It is with great satisfaction that I look forward to sustained scale‐up of jiFUNzeni approach as one of the champions of the approach.

References Akyeampong, K., Pryor, J., Westbrook, J. & Lussier, K. (2011) “Teacher preparation and continuing professional development in Africa: Learning to teach early reading and mathematics” [online] www.sussex.ac.uk/cie/documents/tpa‐synthesis‐report‐july2011.pdf. Batteau, A. W. (2010) Technology and culture. Long Grove, Illinois: Waveland Press, Inc. Brown, A. L. (1992) Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings, Journal of the Learning Sciences, Vol.2 No. 2, pp.141 – 178. Chapman, C. and Harris, A. (2004) “Improving schools in difficult and challenging contexts: Strategies for improvement” Educational Research, Vol.46 No.3, pp. 219 – 228. Crichton, S. & Onguko, B. (in Press), Appropriate technologies for challenging contexts. In S. Marshall & W. Kinuthia (Eds.), Educational design and technology in the knowledge society, Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Design‐based research collective, (2003) “Design‐based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 5‐8. Engestrom, Y. (1987) Learning by expanding: An activity‐theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta‐ konsultit. Garrison, D.R. and Vaughan, N. (2008) Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. San Francisco, CA: Jossey‐Bass. Gunga, S., O. and Ricketts, I., W. (2007) “Facing the challenges of e‐learning initiatives in African universities”, British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 38 No.5, pp. 896 – 906. Harris, A. (2002) “Effective leadership in schools facing challenging contexts” School Leadership & Management, Vol. 22 No.1, pp.15 – 26. Kelly, A. E., Lesh, R. A., & Baek, J. Y. (2008) Preface. In A. E. Kelly, R. A. Lesh,& J. Y. Baek (Eds.), Handbook of design research methods in education: Innovations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics learning and teaching, New York, Routledge. Jifunzeni, (2010) “Our approach” [online] www.jifunzeni.com Joyce, B. (2004) “At Odds: Strategic planning. How are professional learning communities created? History has a few messages”, Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 86 No.1, pp.76 ‐ 83. Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Merriam, S. B. (2001) Andragogy and self‐directed learning: Pillars of adult learning theory, In New directions for adult and continuing education, No. 89. Jossy‐Bass. Onguko, B. B. (2012) Teachers’ professional development in a challenging educational context – a study of actual practice in rural western Kenya, Calgary, Unpublished PhD dissertation. Picciano, A. G. (2009) “Blending with purpose: The multimodal model”, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 7 – 18. Prensky, M. (2001) “Digital natives and digital immigrants”, On the Horizon, Vol. 9, No. 5

335

Brown Onguko Schumacher, E., F. (1973) Small is beautiful: Economics as if people mattered, New York, Harper & Row Publishers. Simiyu, J. W. & Macharia, J. (2008) “E‐Learning as an innovative strategy to increase enrolment in technical and vocational education and training institutions in Kenya”, International Journal of Educational Management, No. 5, pp. 127 – 133. Schwartz, D. L., Chang, J. and Martin, L. (2008), Instrumentation and innovation in design experiments: Taking the turn towards efficiency. In A. E. Kelly, R. A. Lesh,& J. Y. Baek (Eds.), Handbook of design research methods in education: Innovations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics learning and teaching, New York, Routledge. Walker, D. (2006), Toward productive design studies. In J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney and N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research, London, Routledge. Wicklein, R. C. (2005) “Appropriate technology: Value adding application for technology education”, The Technology Teacher, pp. 10 – 12.

336

Learning Analytics: Online Supports Requirements of Learners Revealed Shireen Panchoo1 and Alain Jaillet2 1 University of Technology, La Tour Koenig, Pte aux Sables, Mauritius 2 University of Cergy‐Pontoise, France s.panchoo@umail.utm.ac.mu jaillet@unistra.fr Abstract: The ease with which learners evolve online by integrating online communities and social networks, has forced educators to face the sad reality: contrary to other sectors, the use of Information and Communication Technology has still not effectively enhanced or promoted the teaching and learning processes as desired. Moreover, the high percentage of distant learners abandoning their studies confirms the need of exploiting ICT not only as a communication tool but more importantly, as a supportive and pedagogical tool. It is therefore imperative to understand how learners interact online. What are the supports they need? What are the factors which help them persist in their studies? Are online processes similar to the ones taking place in classroom? Those requirements are necessary input to educational information systems. This paper which is based on a doctoral research, investigates on the learning processes of ten learners enrolled in a completely online masters’ course. More specifically, this research relates to the supports the learners seek online during the tutor‐learners and learner‐learners interactions exchanged via the chat tool in an e‐campus. As methodology, content analysis of their logged textual interactions was done using the qualitative analysis based on the activity theory of Engeström. The 4583 lines of interactions analyzed, reveal that in both types of meetings (with or without their tutor), learners interacted, collaborated and progressed online by making sure that they understood fully their roles and the tasks that are expected from them. Results revealed that the focus of their interactions was not fully centered on the cognitive or meta‐cognitive issues as one would expect during such discussions relating to course materials and problem based assignments. Moreover, learners expected prompt feedback from their tutor in order to clarify doubts and uncertainties that subsist online. As mature learners enrolled on a completely distance course, they proved to be autonomous, responsible and having the capacity to complete successfully their assignment with basic cognitive types of interactions. Socio‐constructivism approach deployed has proved to be supporting the learners pedagogically and psychologically. Thus, tutors are required to play even more challenging and leadership roles online but it is observed that they have limitations in understanding the progress of their learners. Peer supports have been found to be an important factor to help learners persist in their studies. This model, comprising of a successful mixture of technology and pedagogy, has contributed in removing geographical barriers, allowing also for both the northern and southern hemisphere countries to benefit from this model. This learning environment along with the learning strategies and human supports should continue to evolve based on the changing requirements of individuals in online communities. Keywords: virtual environments, online tutoring, supports, e‐learning, online communities, collaboration, interaction, peer supports, content analysis, pedagogy, information and communication technology

1. Introduction The Internet is used as a reference and supporting tool in daily activities of users. Information obtained enables individuals proceed more confidently in their actions and tasks. Likewise, learners have developed specific ways of interacting online (Panchoo 2013) with specific programs, forums and social networks. When interrelated with such environment, learners develop new skills such as searching and comparing for information as well as synthesizing same based on set objectives. They have been qualified to be proactive and multi tasking digital native learners (Panchoo 2012, Kirschner and Karpinski, 2010). However information and communication technology (ICT) is yet to be integrated effectively in the existing programme at higher education level to enable learners evolve and progress proactively in their respective learning processes. The gap between educational research and its implementation is still a matter of concern (Vanderlinde and Van Braak, 2010, Biesta, 2007, Stark and Mandl, 2007). For e‐learning systems, capturing users’ requirements using questionnaires and interviews has not proved to be successful for implementing the online learning processes as they are different from the actual experiences of the users. The processes should be re‐engineered while taking into account problems of online learners and the characteristics of online transactions (Turban, King and Lang 2011). ICT allows for users’ interactions and actions to be logged and the tremendous data available today can be the source for learning analytics. With this methodology, strengths and weaknesses of systems can be observed at real time, giving the possibility and

337

Shireen Panchoo and Alain Jaillet hope for continuous improvement. Indeed educational systems are dynamic and evolving due to change of human’s behaviour and technological advancements. Because it is important to understand learning stages and steps of online learners, it is worth investigating their interactions and involvements during their collaborative work. This study has been conducted in an e‐ campus information system, based on a socio‐constructivist approach. Relevant learning strategies, collaborative environment as well as the tutor’s guidance were provided. The aim of this paper is to identify the ways in which learners interact while depicting their concerns and supports they require in an e‐learning model. Both the tutor‐learners and learner‐learners interactions were analysed.

2. Research context The UNIV‐Rct, the third generation of an e‐campus information system, is a well researched project put in place more than a decade ago (Jaillet 2004). It has successfully been built, based on distance learners requirements to enable them persist and pursue their studies successfully (Panchoo 2010, Audet 2008, Jaillet 2004). The environment, in which this experience took place, is analogical to a conventional campus. It gives the actors the freedom to move from one space to the other as well as interacting with different available synchronous and asynchronous tools. As with regards to the learning strategies, learners were requested to study the uploaded course materials and the problem based assignment before meeting their tutor online. Thus, for the chat sessions, the tutor interacted with a group of 11 learners twice a week, for a duration of an hour. The formative assessment consisted of both individual and collaborative inputs of the learners who were called to work in small groups of three or four learners. Learners enrolled for the completely online master’s course titled the use of ICT in education and training at the University of Cergy‐Pontoise in France, spent a year to complete their studies. For this research, logged interactions of 11 learners were analysed whereby they were in the process of completing a seminar of three weeks. There were two types of exchange: the first kind was led by a tutor and the second one took place among the learners in smaller groups (3‐4 learners), without the presence of the tutor. Their aim was to solve the problem based assignment in their respective team. Details of the number of interactions are given in the table 1. Table 1: Number of lines of interactions in tutorial and team chats 1

Tutorial and teams meetings (three weeks duration) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Lines of interactions

Meetings Tutorials

268 154 333 243

Team 1

66 125 318

Team 2

127 230 30 190 143

42 117

Team 3

142 176 65 297 236

72 110 126 157 207 64 275

998 1520 965 1100

During the four meetings between the tutor and the group of learners, 998 lines of interactions were exchanged. The mentioned group was then put in three teams. During the seminar, ten meetings were organised by the first team with a total number of 1520 lines exchanged during their chats. Team 2 and 3 met eight and seven times respectively.

3. Methodology To understand the type of supports that the learners looked for during their e‐learning process, content analysis was done on the synchronous textual interactions. This methodology, based on the activity theory of Engeström (1987), is composed of several triangles or triads (figure. 1) describing specific actions. Due to the socio‐constructivist approach involving human minds, the activity theory proved to be pertinent in analysing the human interactions (Uden, Kumaresan, and, Salmenjoki 2007, Roussou, Olivier and Slater, 2007), contrary to the conventional methodologies (waterfall model, spiral model) (Panchoo 2010) used for analysis and design of systems.

338

Shireen Panchoo and Alain Jaillet The activity theory in figure 1 shows that the subject (tutor and learner), with the help of appropriate tools, aims at meeting the set objective. For successful result, the rules need be respected by the community to enable them work in collaboration and cooperation (division of labour). Due to the nature of the interactions, the poles subject (tutor and learners) and Community (the collaboration) are dominant in all the exchanges and we have used them as the basis in identifying the relevant triads for our content analysis (Panchoo 2010, Panchoo and Jaillet 2005). Thus six main triads were identified and used to qualify the interactions. They are shown in the table 2: Table 2: Triads for content analysis of interactions Subject Subject Subject Subject Object

Object Rules Tool Division of Labour Division of Labour

Community Community Community Community Community

SOC SRC SOTC SDC COD

Object

Rules

Community

COR

The first meeting we analyzed consisted of 268 lines of teacher‐learners interactions. Line by line, the content was studied and matched with the most relevant triads from table 2. For instance, like all meetings, there were interactions based on socialisation such as greetings (hi, hello, good‐morning, how are you?). The triad Subject‐Rules‐Community triad (figure 1) was chosen as the subject matter relates to the rules of greeting each other in a gathering.

Figure 1: The SRC (subject‐rules‐community) triad This methodology is used to individually code the 4583 lines of interactions as described in table 1.

4. Results and discussions 4.1 Tutorials The synchronous meetings were compulsory. This encouraged collaboration and enabled learners to support each other online. Learners have proved to participate actively during the chat sessions. The more they interact, the more is the possibility of learning. Moore (1989) stressed on the importance of tutor‐students interactions in order to encourage students persist in their distance education course. With the availability of their teacher at real time, the group of 11 learners was free to voice out their opinions and they asked for help with relevant actors. Contrary to the face to face interactions, distant learners are not reluctant or fearful in participating in online discussions (Audet 2008). After analyzing the interactions between the tutor and the students, the results obtained are shown in table 3. Table 3: Results, in percentage, showing the types of tutorial interactions, characterized by Engeström triads Tutorials

SOC (%)

SRC (%)

SOTC (%)

SDC (%)

COD (%)

COR (%)

339

Shireen Panchoo and Alain Jaillet The tutorial discussions were dominated by the rules (SRC) and the objectives of the course (SOC). No interaction was based on the COD (Community‐Object‐Division of labour) triad. This means that the learners did not discuss on the division of their work at this stage. There were also very few interactions which related to SDC (Subject‐Division of Labour‐Community) and COR (Community‐Object‐Rules) triads with the tutor. Regarding the interactions qualified by SOTC (Subject‐Object‐Community), the result stressed that the learners did not refer to problems or incidents that they faced on the use of ICT (connection problems or misuse of chats, forum or related tools) in the online campus. The triad SRC‐Subject‐Rules‐Community was even more dominant than SOC‐Subject‐Object‐Community. To a large extent, the learners were very concerned to know about the rules and policies of what was expected from them. This result reflects on the environment in which the learners were evolving: being physically alone and fully dependent on their peers for the progress of their work, there was the need to clarify issues to enable them progress together with certainty and confidence. They were very much concerned by the roles that they were expected to play as an individual as well as a member of the team. This element of insecurity prompted them to interact with the aim of confirming given facts (how to work in groups, when the assignment was due, what exactly was expected from them with regards to the logistics of the assignment). There was the need for them to progress confidently. Matters relating to the course content and the assignment itself (SOC: 19% to 30%) were not well discussed. Once the assignment and the tutor’s expectations were clarified and understood, they moved to other rules issues. The tutor’s presence is of utmost importance. During the duration of the tutorials, he led the chat sessions by communicating important information to the learners. He queried on questions that the learners might have. The chats consist of a series of questions and answers (mostly on SRC as mentioned). It is worth noting that the e‐tutor has the power to lead, orient and direct the chat as per his preferences. Online, as a group, the learners do not hesitate to interact: they directed their queries to him and participated fully. It is obvious that, contrary to face to face sessions, learners interacted easily and participated actively online (Panchoo 2010, Audet 2008).

4.2 Teams interactions The group of eleven learners (L) met their tutor during four tutorial sessions as mentioned. Instructions and guidelines were given to all of them during the tutorial sessions. The learners were then assigned to their teams to work out the same assignment. Team 1 consisted of three learners and teams 2 and 3 had four learners. Table 4: Results, in percentage, showing the types of interactions exchanged by three teams, characterized by Engeström triads Meetings

SOC (%)

SRC (%)

SOTC (%)

SDC (%)

COD (%)

COR (%)

Team 1 (3 L)

Team 2 (4 L)

Team 3 (4 L)

Results obtained as shown in table 4 are not much different from the ones obtained in the previous section on tutorial with regards to the high number of interactions coded by SRC and SOC. However, team 2 interacted more on SOC and less on SRC compared to the two teams. It is to be noted that interactions categorised by SRC are less than those in tutorials. Because the teams have to refer to the course content and understand the requirements of the problem based assignment, there has been an increase in the percentage of interactions on SOC. There were also discussions coded by COD (from 1% to 5%) which necessitated discussions on the assignment followed by the division of tasks based on the assignment. Likewise, there were few percentages of discussions related to COR (from 0 to 3%) which required for rules and procedures to be mentioned on the assignment. Online, as per the results obtained, it was obvious that the learners were focused on the need to complete the assignment. The methodologies adopted to complete their respective assignments did not therefore include much cognitive and meta‐cognitive debate. In fact, the learners were proved to be polite and respectful and they would not go to the extent of dealing with conflicts and negotiations. Thus, the teams enjoyed and maintained good relationship, while privileging understanding and agreements among themselves. Passive

340

Shireen Panchoo and Alain Jaillet agreements were observed whereby members of the team suggested ideas which were readily accepted by others. As such, their assignment was completed smoothly but the lack of debates was to the detriment of group reasoning and cognitive interactions. (Mitchell, Nicholas and Boyle 2008; Watson and, Moritz 2001). The group of 11 students was coached at the same time, in the manner and by the same tutor. Then there were divided in three teams to work the same assignment in parallel. It would be interesting to find out if their interactions categorized by the identified triads were similar in the different teams. In table 5, the active triads were computed and sorted accordingly with the aim of understanding the types of interactions both during the tutorials and in teams. Table 5: Differences in the percentages of interactions coded by triads among the three teams Triads

Meetings

COD COR SDC SOC SOTC SRC

Tutorial Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Tutorial Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Tutorial Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Tutorial Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Tutorial Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Tutorial Team 1 Team 2 Team 3

Percentages of interactions, sorted by triads Average Median Maximum Minimum 0.00 (0.000) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.98 (0.406) 0.49 3.85 0.00 4.64 (0.793) 4.32 7.89 1.74 2.04 (1.092) 0.70 8.90 0.00 1.51 (0.655) 1.45 3.14 0.00 0.26 (0.197) 0.00 1.94 0.00 3.10 (0.996) 2.17 10.22 0.00 1.04 (0.399) 0.81 3.14 0.00 0.74 (0.296) 0.77 1.43 0.00 11.10 (2.056) 10.17 24.19 1.15 8.72 (1.480) 7.14 18.18 4.35 8.47 (1.239) 8.82 12.57 3.68 23.81 (2.747) 23.37 30.07 18.42 22.43 (5.617) 25.64 46.03 1.61 33.37 (5.243) 31.30 53.24 18.42 33.04 (4.740) 30.98 53.37 17.46 0.19 (0.188) 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.28 (0.172) 0.00 1.59 0.00 0.24 (0.171) 0.00 1.45 0.00 0.15 (0.100) 0.00 0.61 0.00 73.71 (2.810) 73.28 79.70 68.57 64.96 (5.571) 69.15 84.80 38.83 49.92 (4.430) 52.17 70.00 35.25 55.26 (5.021) 55.07 73.00 40.43

Obviously the triads COD, COR and SOTC were less activated across all the meetings. Triad SRC has scored the highest percentage followed by SOC. We note however a similarity with regards to the proportion of the different triads activated in the three teams. Due to the differences in the number of interactions in the different teams, we consider the median as our point of reference. Interestingly, the results revealed that the three independent teams did have a similarity in the type of interactions exchanged. The SRC triad has the highest percentage (from 52% to 69%) in the teams followed by SOC (from 26% to 32%). The teams did not face any major technical problems, confirmed by a median of zero. Likewise percentages of interactions coded by COD, COR and SDC were similar in the three teams. Learning analytics enables researchers understand different actors’ processes and actions at real time. In distance education, it is even more tedious to reach all learners by giving them adequate and personalized supports in their learning processes. The high rate of learners’ abandoning (Panchoo 2012, 2010, Audet 2008) their studies highlights the status and reality of actual educational processes. The e‐learning system put in place and described in this paper, has given threshold results and is very encouraging. Learners have proved to be proactive in planning, organizing meetings, cooperate and collaborate among themselves. It is however obvious that they need strong guidance to evolve confidently in their studies. This has been found to be an

341

Shireen Panchoo and Alain Jaillet important factor contributing to the success of the online course. In the e‐learning mode, because the learners are physically alone and there prevails an atmosphere of insecurity, the high number of interactions clearly depicts the importance of supports in distance education. The types of supports they looked for are not mainly related to the course or the assignment. This result, showing non cognitive types of interaction, is surprising in the sense that, educational processes are mapped automatically to cognitive and meta‐cognitive issues. The interactions in both the tutorials and in all the three teams clearly highlight a call for non cognitive supports as well. Therefore we learn that learners do need different types of supports to help them pursue their studies. This may be one of the means that can be used to reduce the abandoning rates for distance learners.

5. Conclusion Learning analytics methodology used clear indicates that learners enrolled in distance education mode need different types of supports to enable them succeed in their studies. Technological supports namely proper environment with relevant tools such as synchronous and asynchronous communications, have contributed in the smooth running of the course. Learning strategies put in place have been contributed in guiding them perform activities set by specialists. More than ever, the tutor is asked to play important and challenging roles (Panchoo and Jaillet 2012, Panchoo 2010). Not only are they requested to be the content specialists but their presence is of utmost importance. Learners need psychological and pedagogical aids in their learning processes. They have the capabilities to search for information and complete their assignment by cooperating and collaborating. Therefore the mature learners have proved to be autonomous, responsible and having the capacity to complete successfully their assignment with basic cognitive types of interactions. This is an important input to help e‐learning systems progress. Peer supports in distance education have also proved to be important in supporting distant learners. This has helped reduce the feeling of loneliness experienced by the learners. Cooperation and collaboration enable learners to support each other in converging towards the same objectives. Consolidating the social relationships among the actors has contributed in helping the students evolve while depending and trusting their peers (Swan 2003). As future work, it would be interesting to research on different styles of coaching, guidance of the tutors and their impact on cognitive issues. They do play an important role in the learning processes of learners. It would also be interesting to study the impact on the learners’ performance if the tutor encourage and guide them to cognitive discussions. This is challenging as means and ways need to be found to enable tutors give pertinent, personalised feedbacks to the learners. Relevant information systems are necessary to enable tutors give more pertinent feedback. There is a lack of technological supports to facilitate them understand past interactions in order to enable them give better and effective individualised feedback and guidance (Panchoo 2012).

References Biesta, G. (2007), “Bridging the gap between educational research and educational practice: the need for critical distance”, Educational Research and Evaluation, 13, 295–301. Engeström, Y. (1987), “Learning by expanding”, Helsinki: Orienta‐Konsultit Oy”, 1987 Jaillet, A., L’école à l’ère numérique : des nouveaux espaces pédagogiques à l’Enseignement à Distance, Editions harmattan, 2004, 260 p. Kirschner, P. and Karpinski, A., (2010), “Facebook and academic performance, Computers in human behaviour”, Elsevier, 26, pp 1237‐1245, downloaded on 24 Feb 2013, http://www.academia.edu/230379/Facebook_and_Academic_Performance Mitchell, R., Nicholas, S., and Boyle, B. (2008), “The Impact of Cognitive Conflict on Team Performance”, Asia Pacific Management Review, 13(3), pp 625‐634. Panchoo, S. (2010), « Interagir pour collaborer et apprendre à distance avec les Technologies de l’Information et de la Communication: Approche méthodologique d’étude des interactions d’une formation à distance », Thesis, University of Cergy‐Pontoise, Paris. Panchoo, S. (2012), “Using The Social Network Analysis As A Pedagogical Tool To Enhance Online Interactions”, International Conference on Advanced Computer Science Applications and Technologies, ACSAT 20102, Palace of the Golden Horses, Mines Resort City, Malaysia, 26‐28 November. Panchoo, S., (2013), “E‐campus as an environmental and pedagogical tool for online support”, International conference on e‐education, e‐business, e‐management and e‐learning, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, Dubai, Jan 2013. Panchoo, S., and Jaillet, A. (2005) « Les démarches des acteurs lors des réunions synchrones à distance », XXIIe Congrès de l'AIPU, Publication d’actes sur Cédérom, Switzerland, 12‐14 September.

342

Shireen Panchoo and Alain Jaillet Panchoo, S., and Jaillet, A., (2012), « Quels soutiens recherchent les apprenants lors d’un tutorat en ligne ? » Colloque scientifique international sur les TIC en éducation : bilan, enjeux actuels et perspectives futures, Montréal, Canada, 3 & 4, May. Roussou, M., Olivier, M., and Slater, M., (2007), “Exploring activity theory as a tool for evaluating interactivity and learning in virtual environments for children”, Springer‐Verlag, London Limited, pp.141‐153. Stark, R. and Mandl, H. (2007), “Bridging the gap between basic and applied research by an integrative research approach”, Educational Research and Evaluation, 13, 249–261. Swan, K. (2003), “Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students' perceived learning and satisfaction”, Journal of Asynchronous Learning, 7(1). Turban, E., King, D., and Lang, J., (2011), Introduction to Electronic Commerce, Pearson, Third, International Edition. Uden, L., Kumaresan, A., and, Salmenjoki, K., (2007)“Usable collaborative email requirements using activity theory”, Informatica 31, pp. 71‐83, http://ai.ijs.si/informatica/PDF/31‐1/18_Uden‐Usable%20Collaborated...pdf, downloaded on Oct. 2012. Vanderlinde, R. and Braak V. (2010), “The gap between educational research and practice: views of teachers, school leaders, intermediaries and researchers”, British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 36, No. 2, April 2010, pp. 299‐ 316. Watson, J. And Moritz, J. (2001), “The role of cognitive conflict in developing students’ understanding of chance th measurement”, 24 annual MERGA conference, Sydney, July.

343

Optimising the use of Online Technology for Learning and Teaching Science Joy Penman1 and Jyothi Thalluri2 1 Centre for Regional Engagement, University of South Australia, Whyalla, Australia 2 Division of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia joy.penman @unisa.edu.au jyothi.thalluri@unisa.edu.au Abstract: This paper investigates the introduction of online initiatives, namely, electronic learning communities, online self‐ assessments, online problem‐based conferencing, and the inclusion of multi‐media learning tools to offer practically oriented science learning to urban and regional science students. It examines the issues surrounding the implementation of these technological innovations by identifying the perceptions of the students about their use, illuminating their impact on students, and clarifying the practical issues encountered in the application of these online initiatives. A descriptive analytical approach was used to explore the experiences of students in the use of these innovations. The technological initiatives are embedded in the Thalluri‐Penman Best Practice Model for teaching and learning sciences for health science students. This model aims to improve the learning experiences of science students and increase student retention and success rates. The model also links students from urban and rural areas, studying both on‐ and off‐campus, with the university campus and with co‐students and is primarily structured to boost students’ confidence in studying sciences. Findings of the evaluations show that the technology exemplified in this paper provides: an approximation of face‐to‐face lecturing when it is not possible for a lecturer to be at the same site as the class; enhance communication between students and lecturers; and help students access, collaborate and interact with each other. The use of technology that is carefully considered in each stage of the program has been shown to enhance the quality of university teaching and learning, allowing students greater accessibility, flexibility and interaction. Keywords: online technology, e‐learning, flexibility, learning and teaching

1. Introduction It has been observed for many years that health science students undertaking science‐based programs are confronted by educational challenges. The branches of science dealing with structures, functions and disease processes of the body and management of conditions appear to be stumbling blocks for students. Learning science courses is not easy (Strube, Thalluri & Kokkinn 2004). Enormous amounts of information must be remembered and reading science literature is difficult. Moreover, increased access to higher educational opportunities in health science courses has led to diverse equity student cohorts with a wide range of academic abilities. Some students, particularly those from regional areas with limited choice in school subjects, may have learning difficulties often associated with a poor background in biology and basic sciences essential to understanding the human body. Students who fail their sciences are delayed in their academic progress and may even decide to leave the program altogether. Iling (1998, cited in Zeegers and Martin 2001), stresses the costly implications of student failure rates at university. Consequently, our University has organised campus‐ and program‐specific systems and processes to help students succeed in their science courses. Some of these include: orientation activities to introduce new students to library facilities and the online environment; the employment of learning advisers who work closely with students to enhance their academic skills; and adopting appropriate pedagogies in teaching science courses. Another strategy is the optimal use of information and communication technology (ICT) by making learning resources available on‐line and encouraging discussion groups that allow students greater interaction. The heterogeneity of our students and limitations in rural and regional areas necessitate different and creative strategies to assist students to achieve academic success. Contemporary teaching and learning models in health science that can accommodate such diverse requirements are imperative. The Thalluri‐Penman conceptual model is one such framework. It represents the culmination of 45 years of teaching experience combined and the development of innovative learning initiatives designed to contribute to individual student success and positive learning experiences in studying health sciences in higher education.

344

Joy Penman and Jyothi Thalluri The Thalluri‐Penman model is student‐focused and an interactive framework for teaching and learning health sciences. The model aims to guide the delivery and coordination of science courses in order to improve students’ positive learning experience and improve student retention and success rates. The approach also links students from urban and regional areas, studying both on‐ and off‐campus, with the university campus and with fellow students. It is structured to: boost students’ confidence in studying sciences; provide instant feedback to large classes using the latest technology; increase students’ capacity to succeed as university students; create and enhance students’ positive and satisfying learning experience; reduce students’ fears about studying science; and minimise the risk of students dropping out of science‐based university studies. The model highlights the optimal use of ICTs, specifically the maintenance of electronic learning communities, online self‐assessments, online problem‐based conferencing, and inclusion of multi‐media learning tools. The description and analysis of the impact of these ICT initiatives is the focus of this paper. The paper concludes by discussing the implication of the initiatives in the educational preparation of students.

2. The Thalluri‐Penman conceptual model The application of the Thalluri‐Penman conceptual model for learning and teaching science successfully begins at the time of students’ first encounter with the university and extends right through to the completion of their health science program. See Figure 1. Emphasis is placed on achieving sound learning outcomes in such areas as anatomy and physiology, pathophysiology, pathology, microbiology and pharmacology, relating to various health science programs, such as Nursing, Medical Radiation, Physiotherapy, Occupational Therapy, Pharmacy and Podiatry, offered by the University of South Australia (UniSA). The model has evolved from listening to students talking about their learning experiences, looking for insights to help them engage more effectively with their studies, and devising ways to make this engagement happen. The model therefore incorporates features that students have found empowering and relevant to their learning needs. Real-life learning environments Optimal use of ICT Peer-mentoring Preparing for the Pedagogy Urban and Rural, On- and OffCampus Health Science Students IBL, PBL study of science Coaching scheme e-learning groups, online tests Development of meta-cognitive skills

Figure 1: The Thalluri‐Penman conceptual model for the successful learning and teaching of science Legend: IBL (inquiry‐based learning); PBL (problem‐based learning); CBR (case‐based reasoning); ICT (information and communications technology) The key features of the model include a number of staged initiatives across students’ health science undergraduate program. Depicted in the innermost sphere is the core of the conceptual model – the students with their diverse backgrounds and needs trying to learn sciences. Reflected in the second sphere are the pedagogies such as inquiry‐based learning (IBL) and problem‐based learning (PBL) on which science teaching is based.

345

Joy Penman and Jyothi Thalluri In IBL, learning is organised around the individual rather than the content and students learn problem‐solving skills, informal reasoning as well as constantly seeking relevance and connections (Duffy & Cunningham 2001; Stripling 2003). IBL falls under the constructivist approach characterised by collaboration, active engagement and personal relevance, amongst others (Savery & Duffy 1996). PBL, on the other hand, is an instructional methodology that allows the attainment of knowledge and skills through real practice situations (Williams 2001). The learners are immersed in the PBL context, requiring them to learn the complexities of an authentic problem, search for connections across different bodies of knowledge, recognise what they know and what they need to know about a problem, and suggest solutions to a given problem derived from the workplace (Gonzalez & Salmoni 2008). In the PBL process, students go through various stages, such as formulating explanations, clarifying personal understanding, critiquing resources, identifying gaps in knowledge, and synthesising what has been learnt and how best to approach the problem (Williams 2001). Symbolised in the third sphere are pre‐university activities for beginning students. In particular, the three‐day to a week‐long preparatory course called Preparing for Biosciences, is offered to students to introduce them to the language, basic concepts, and clinical usefulness of biosciences (Penman 2005). This short course currently targets incoming students, many of whom are transitioning to university study from non‐traditional backgrounds and who have diverse equity characteristics and learning needs. For first‐year students, a student‐driven peer‐mentoring program (also called student coaching scheme and Golden Key tutoring scheme) is available and this is represented in the fourth sphere of the conceptual model. This initiative provides opportunity for second‐ and third‐year nursing students, who have achieved highly satisfactory grades for all bioscience courses, to receive training to act as mentors to first‐year students and to those who have been identified as ‘at risk’ in their bioscience and pathophysiology studies (Penman & White 2006; Thalluri, Kokkinn & O’Flaherty 2008). Embedded in the fifth sphere is the optimal use of ICT for all levels of students. Of the many ICTs used and integrated in course delivery, the electronic learning communities, online self‐assessments, online problem‐ based conferencing and multi‐media learning tools, are examined for this paper. The final and outermost sphere in the Thalluri‐Penman model depicted in Figure 1 symbolises the contextualisation of science, where science is applied specifically to the roles of the future health professionals, illustrating the implications of science for real‐life environments and future practices. In addition, students are taught to think about their thinking and learning, and develop meta‐cognitive skills which will prepare them for life‐long learning. Skills that are metacognitive in nature include: planning the way to approach a learning task, monitoring comprehension, and evaluating the progress towards the completion of a task; they include knowledge about when and how to use particular strategies for learning, problem solving or creative and analytical thinking (Metcalfe & Shimamura 1994).

3. Information and communications technologies used The electronic learning communities (also referred to as online discussion groups), online assessment and online problem‐based conferencing via discussion groups are part of the UniSAnet online learning environment developed in house at the university. The electronic learning communities have been used in various fields, incorporating both synchronous and asynchronous electronic communications. E‐learning and e‐teaching is possible and potentially useful for interaction and collaboration, which are crucial for effectively engaging off‐campus students and minimising student disengagement. The creation of electronic learning groups, which are carefully designed learning communities whose members work together online to benefit each other, is central to successful engagement in science materials. These have been shown to supplement face‐to‐face teaching and foster further learning beyond the classroom (McCarthy, Smith & DeLuca 2010). Online self‐assessment is a mechanism of ongoing formative assessment for first‐year students in nursing and midwifery, and other levels as well. This initiative encourages students to monitor their own progress in the bioscience and clinical science courses and offers complete flexibility in the manner in which students can undertake the assessments. Assuming responsibility for one’s own learning is a critical aim of tertiary education, and one which underpins the capacity for students to engage with lifelong learning and exercise

346

Joy Penman and Jyothi Thalluri good judgement about their body of knowledge, consequently assisting in the development of two of UniSA’s graduate qualities (UniSA 2009a). Online problem‐based conferencing is using discussion forums to serve as a learning space where students construct knowledge. Pre‐determined real‐life cases with problems and corollary questions are provided to students. A case reports typically on a client presenting to a hospital with various medical complaints (Ward & Hartley 2006). Students attempt to solve the general problems of disease causation and suitable interventions. Discussions are threaded so that learners can follow successive postings to a topic. Finally, the inclusion of multi‐media learning is important to science learning, especially for regional students. These tools include a mix of ICT and practical applications: podcasts and vodcasts that enable all science students to listen to lectures, keep abreast of issues, and gain valuable insights into the latest development in sciences; a pathology resource that is a novel self‐directed learning tool, and a variety of initiatives that add value, interaction, collaboration and fun in teaching and learning sciences, namely: electronic games, online specimens for examination, educational field trips to science laboratories, videoconferencing, Centra, virtual classroom and the audience‐response system. Of these, emphasis in this paper will be given to the audience‐ response system (ARS), commonly called ‘clickers’. ARS involves the use of hand‐held devices whereby students can input a response to a multiple‐choice question with results being anonymously and instantaneously graphically displayed for immediate feedback and discussion.

4. Context First‐ and second‐year nursing students evaluated these technological advances from 2008 to 2010 in a metropolitan and regional campus of our university. Thirty‐four (n=34) second‐year off‐campus nursing students evaluated the electronic learning communities created. One‐hundred twenty‐six (n=126) first‐year nursing students were surveyed for the online assessments. Seventeen (n=17) second‐year off‐campus nursing students evaluated the online problem‐based conferencing, while one‐hundred ninety‐two (n=192) first‐year nursing on‐campus students were surveyed about their perceptions on the use of ‘clickers’.

5. Methodology Survey methodology was used to evaluate the different ICT initiatives. The electronic learning communities were evaluated by inviting students to respond to questions on how discussion pages helped them in their studies and difficulties they encountered. The invitation posted on the discussion pages at the conclusion of the science course included an explanation of the purpose of the survey. E‐mail was used to send follow‐up reminders to participate in the survey. The use of online self‐assessment and audience‐response system were evaluated via the university’s course evaluation instrument (CEI), consisting of ten core Likert‐type questions to which students agreed or disagreed. Optional questions were attached to the CEI specifically for the online self‐assessment and audience‐response system querying the value and impact of the ICTs on the students. On the other hand, the online problem‐based conferencing was evaluated by a ten‐item anonymous Likert‐ type questionnaire, followed by four open‐ended questions, administered via web‐based TellUs2 (UniSA 2009b). Students were asked to indicate the extent of their agreement with statements describing their experiences with the use of technology. Other items explored students’ general perceptions and suggestions for improvement. Survey information given to the students included a statement regarding the voluntary nature of participation and assurance of confidentiality. Completion of the survey was taken as consent.

6. Students’ perceptions of the technologies Results of the evaluations of these ICTs are reflected in the following tables. The evaluation of the electronic learning communities showed that these were most favourably rated by the students. Of the 78 students enrolled in the science unit using discussion boards, 34 responded to the survey, for a 44% response rate. All respondents (n=34) agreed that the discussion pages had helped them in their study of the course. See Table 1.

347

Joy Penman and Jyothi Thalluri Table 1: Student perceptions about electronic learning communities Questions How have the discussion pages helped you?

Comments (representative responses) “daily contact with lecturer” “helped to keep on track” “allowed students to share tec hniques to understand the material” “provided challenge” “personal connection” “support and guidance” “learning deep and meaningful” “linking of knowledge and experience” “I can honestly say it was fun” “reflection” “enriched by others’ personal experience” “quick responses to any queries” “additional revision questions” “keeping in touch with other students” “what keeps me going and are a great support … as sometimes one feels so isolated” “preparing us for exams” “makes me feel part of something special” “[lecturer] was monitoring our progress”

Online self‐assessment tests have many positive outcomes for student‐centred learning and improved student feedback, according to the 126 survey respondents. See Table 2. Table 2: Student perceptions about online self assessment Statement Online self‐assessment quizzes give me instant feedback. Online self‐assessment quizzes help me to focus on the areas to learn. Online self‐assessment quizzes are good practice to prepare for fortnightly tests and the final exam. Flexibility of time enables me to practise online self‐assessment quizzes often.

Agree to strongly agree N=126 91 79

Percentage

72 63

Of the 46 students enrolled in the unit who participated in online problem‐based conferencing, 17 responded to the survey, for a 37% response rate. Overall, results of the survey also showed similar positive impressions of the online approach initiated. The students articulated that it assisted their learning, facilitated collaboration with peers and interaction with the lecturer, was innovative, and was an effective way to learn. Table 3 summarises part of the survey results. Table 3: Student perceptions about online problem‐based conferencing Statement I was adequately introduced to the strengths and limitations of online problem‐based conferencing. The duration of the online problem‐based conferencing was acceptable. Online problem‐based conferencing assisted my learning of the topic. Online problem‐based conferencing provided opportunities to interact with the lecturer. This approach allowed ample opportunities to collaborate with peers. My experience with online problem‐based conferencing was pleasant. This approach was a good substitute for classroom experience. This approach was an effective way to learn. This approach offered an innovative learning experience. I recommend this approach to learning to other students.

348

Agree to strongly agree N=17 9

Percentage

13 12 10

77 71 59

Joy Penman and Jyothi Thalluri The responses evaluating the importance of the ARS application within the first‐year student cohort in biosciences indicated the beneficial effects of the technology for students’ academic experience and satisfaction. A survey of 192 students revealed that a significant number of these students either agreed or strongly agreed that the ARS improved personalised learning, increased interactions, focused learning and provided instant feedback. See Table 4. Table 4: Student perceptions about audience‐response system Statement ARS improved my learning of the topic. ARS made practicals and tutorials more interactive. ARS helped me to focus on areas that I needed to learn. ARS provided instant feedback.

Agree to strongly agree N=192 173

Percentage

177

163

180

7. Discussion This paper highlighted the use of ICTs, which is a significant part of the Thalluri‐Penman model for successful learning and teaching of health sciences. The Thalluri‐Penman conceptual model is premised on the belief that developing and implementing innovative learning initiatives for commencing and continuing health science undergraduates can significantly contribute to individual student success and positive learning experience. The model embraces electronic learning (e‐learning); it provides ‘new, interesting, rewarding, exciting and effective’ way of learning (Santy & Smith 2007, p. 1). E‐learning incorporates ICT to enhance learning and teaching and networking is an essential feature of e‐learning. While e‐learning is similar with distance learning in purpose, it is different because it uses online communication tools that keep students engaged with fellow students, lecturers, and course content. Best of all is the 24‐hour sharing of information and communication between learners and quick access to learning materials. However, in accordance with university best practice in teaching, it is important that academics continually evaluate each innovation that they undertake. Evaluation of the ICTs is crucial in order to optimise the use of the technology and continue improving on it. It is important also to meet the needs of students and lecturers, gain feedback, minimise expense and enhance course delivery.

8. Benefits of ICTs according to the students The results of the evaluation of e‐learning communities indicated that they were beneficial for various reasons and these could be categorised as intrapersonal and interpersonal benefits. Intrapersonal benefits included: enabling “learning [to be] deep and meaningful”, “[helping] to keep on track”, allowing “daily contact with lecturer”, receiving “quick responses to any queries”, “[providing] challenge” and “personal connection” and making readily available “support and guidance”. Interpersonal benefits included: “[allowing] students to share techniques to understand the material” with each other, being “enriched by others’ personal experience”, “keeping in touch with other students” and providing support “… as sometimes one feels so isolated.” Likewise, there were many personal benefits derived by students in participating in online self‐assessments. Their responses were grouped under the following: taking responsibility for their own learning, obtaining feedback on their understanding, contributing to further knowledge development, inspiration to engage with the course readings, and assistance with overall learning and exam preparation (See also Thalluri, Wache & Hiscock 2006 and Thalluri 2007). Students commented: “Great form of independent study where I could see areas I needed to work on without having access to a lecturer.” “Excellent for instant feedback and identifies areas that need improvement.” “They cover points that I had not thought to read about. By taking the quizzes I have improved my knowledge on subjects.” “Very good complement to the readings.”

349

Joy Penman and Jyothi Thalluri The evaluation of PBL supported by online technology revealed that this ICT was workable for the purpose of the course considering the desirable outcomes that were achieved. Results showed that learning was enhanced and that the learning environment created provided a high level of interaction and engagement. There was greater collaboration and cooperation within groups, free and open communication among students and the teacher and opportunity to develop skills (See also Penman & Cook 2009). The comments from students throw further light on the benefits derived from this ICT: “Good way to learn” “See and learn other presentations and topics” “Look more in depth into the topic” The application of ARS, particularly in a large classroom environment, has been widely reported to be effective as it has enhanced learning and improved the learners’ alertness, increased the ease with which teachers are able to engage all students in frequent formative assessment and fostered active participation by students in their own learning (Beekes, 2006; Roschelle, Penuel & Abrahamson 2004). Similar benefits have been identified with the group of science students surveyed in our study and these are exemplified below (See also Thalluri & Shepherd 2011). “... this method worked extremely well as it forced more in‐depth thinking about the topic and facilitated group discussion.” “The ARS really helped students to understand where they need improving without singling anyone out.” “ARS is a great way to apply the knowledge learnt from the tutes and provides instant feedback. It is also a great way to interact with peers and has made me feel more comfortable in class.”

9. Issues and concerns While there may be many benefits derived from using these technologies, there are also several issues and concerns in their use. Many students are limited by their ability to access the technology, while others do not possess the required technical skills nor devote adequate time and effort for e‐learning (Santy & Smith 2007). For e‐learning to be beneficial, students need to be active learners; they need to be consistent, disciplined, and organised also. Furthermore, while e‐learning enhanced by various ICT applications provides a stimulating learning environment, it requires students to be self‐directed and motivated in their studies. In our evaluation, some students had misgivings about online problem‐based conferencing because they felt ill‐prepared in using the technology. They appraised this ICT application negatively by reporting that: “We needed more time to become familiar with technology.” “More explanations about what is expected.” “Guidelines were unclear.” “It took up far too much time to complete a presentation.” This tells us that the use of ICTs must be carefully and strategically planned and implemented taking into consideration the readiness of individuals in embracing technological changes. ICT applications require the full cooperation and support of academics who may already be experiencing pressure to keep up with technological changes. Setting up the relevant questions for the online assessments was challenging and time consuming. Staff members involved were overwhelmed with emails from students requesting information about how to access these resources and assessments. Another concern is the cost of the ARS devices which was a bit prohibitive. Moreover, ICT is not necessarily a panacea for improving the quality of teaching and learning; it is important that academics continually evaluate each innovation and appraise their changing practices. The ‘high tech’ of technological resources and the ‘high touch’ of human responses to them, to use Naisbitt’s terms (Naisbitt 1982), are aspects of learning that academics must strive to achieve. Good technology does not compensate for poor teaching practices (Penman & Ellis 2008). According to Naisbitt, the ‘high tech’ of technological innovations does not do away with the need for the human aspect – the ‘high touch’. In our study, a student observed online assessments negatively stating that: “… the nature of the assessment was that there was no face‐to‐face contact with students nor lecturers.”

350

Joy Penman and Jyothi Thalluri The more advanced the technology, the greater the need for supplementing it with the real or virtual presence of keen, caring teachers, along with supportive colleagues, if its benefits are to be maximised. Being aware of this need for ‘high touch’, future evaluations need to include items that implicitly gauge the success of ICT integration in course delivery. An academic commented: “There is a need for controlled conditions to demonstrate objective improvement in student experience and satisfaction.”

10. Conclusion The Thalluri‐Penman model provides a structured set of innovative learning initiatives for commencing and continuing health science undergraduates. The conceptual model has significantly contributed to individual student success and positive learning experience at UniSA. It is an evolved approach which reflects the accumulated wisdom and experience of both of these university teachers and addresses contemporary and best practice teaching and learning requirements for diverse student cohorts. ICT is embedded in the model and the various initiatives implemented have positively impacted on students’ experience and performance in studying sciences. From our study, the use of technology that is carefully considered in each stage of the program has been shown to enhance the quality of university teaching and learning, allowing greater accessibility, flexibility and interaction. However, it is imperative also that academics consider these information and communications technology and electronic learning with caution because of some issues and concerns they raise. They need to carefully and strategically plan their ICT applications and continually evaluate the same.

References Beekes, W. (2006) “The “Millionaire” method for encouraging participation”, Active Learning and Higher Education, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 25–36. Department of Education, Science and Technology. (2002) “Terms of Reference for the Higher Education Bandwidth Advisory Committee”, [online], http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/higher_education/policy_issues_reviews/reviews/previous_reviews/higher_educati on_bandwidth_advisory/terms_of_reference.htm. Duffy, M. and Cunningham, D. J. (2001) “Constructivism: Implications for the Design and Delivery of Instruction, The Association of Educational Communications and Technology”, [online], http://www.aect.org/intranet/publicationd/edtech/07/index.html. Gonzalez, M.L. and Salmoni, A.J. (2008) “Online problem‐based learning in postgraduate medical education – content analysis of reflection comments”, Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 183‐192. McCarthy, J.W., Smith, J.L. and DeLuca, D. (2010) “Using online discussion boards with large and small groups to enhance learning of assistive technology”, Journal of Computing in Higher Education, Vol. 22, pp. 95–113. Metcalfe, J. and Shimamura, A.P. (1994) Metacognition: knowing about knowing, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Naisbitt, J. (1982) From forced technology to high tech/high touch. In Megatrends: Ten New Directions Transforming Our Lives (pp. 39‐53), Macdonald, London & Sydney. Penman, J. (2005) Preparing for Sciences’ workshop: A new initiative for Whyalla nursing students, in A. Brew & C. Asmar (Eds.) Annual International HERDSA Conference on Higher Education in a Changing World, Sydney, 3‐7 July, pp. 381‐ 388, HERDSA Inc, Milperra, NSW. Penman, J. and Cook, J. (2009) Off‐campus nursing students online for science studies, Annual International HERDSA Conference on the Student Experience, Darwin, 6‐9 July. Penman, J. and Ellis, B. (2008) Evaluating technology‐based learning: “High‐tech” and “high‐touch”, in J. McConachie, M. Singh, P. Danaher, F. Nouwens and G. Danaher (Eds.), Changing University Learning and Teaching: Engaging and Mobilising Leadership, Quality and Technology, pp. 339‐358, Post Pressed, Brisbane. Penman, J. and White, F. (2006) Peer‐mentoring program ‘pop‐up’ model for regional nursing students, Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 124‐136. Roschelle, J., Penuel, W.R. and Abrahamson, L. (2004) Classroom response and communication systems: Research Review and Theory. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA. Santy, J. and Smith, L. (2007). Being an E‐learner in health and social care. Routledge, Oxon. Savery, J. and Duffy, T. (1996) Problem‐based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework, in B. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist Learning Environments: Case Studies in Instructional Design, pp. 135‐148, Educational Technology Publications, New Jersey. Stripling, B.K. (2003) Inquiry‐based Learning, in B.K. Stripling and S.H.H. Westport (Eds.), Curriculum Connections through the Library (Principles and Practice), pp. 3‐39, Libraries Unlimited, Connecticut. Strube, P., Thalluri, J. and Kokkinn, B. (2004) Strategies for success in Human Biosciences, In: H. Calabretto & B. Kokkinn (Eds), Strategies for Success in Nursing Studies. 2nd ed. pp. 107‐113, School of Nursing & Midwifery, University of South Australia, Adelaide.

351

Joy Penman and Jyothi Thalluri Thalluri J (2007) “Course tailored continuous online formative self‐assessment tool improves students’ academic performance in biosciences”, Focus on Health Professional Education: A Multi‐disciplinary Journal, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 97‐100. Thalluri, J., Kokkinn, B. and O’Flaherty, J. (2008) “A Student Coaching Scheme (SCS) for First Year University Students: Positive Learning Experiences and Individual Success in Biosciences”, International Journal of Learning, Vol. 15, No. 9, pp. 135‐144. Thalluri, J. and Shepherd, P. (2011) “Enhancing student learning experiences using an audience response system”, Focus on Health Professional Education: A Multi‐disciplinary Journal, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 90‐93. Thalluri, J., Wache D. and Hiscock, J. (2006) “Enhancing Student Feedback Satisfaction Level from a large class Using Online Self Assessment Tasks (SAT)”, International Journal of Learning, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 137‐145. University of South Australia. (2009a) “Graduate Qualities”, [online]. UniSA, http://w3.unisa.edu.au/gradquals/default.asp. University of South Australia. (2009b) “Quick reference guide ‐ TellUs2”, [online]. UniSA, http://w3.unisa.edu.au/helptellus2/quick‐guide.asp. Ward, K. and Hartley, J. (2006) “Using a virtual learning environment to address one problem with problem based learning”, Nurse Education in Practice, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 85‐91. Williams, B. (2001) “Developing critical reflection for professional practice through problem‐based learning”, Journal of Advanced Nursing, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 27‐34. Zeegers, P. and Martin, L. (2001) “A learning‐to‐learn program in a first‐year chemistry class”, Higher Education Research and Development, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 35‐52.

352

Using Social Embeddedness to Explore Ubiquitous Learning in Mobile Environments at a South African University of Technology Patient Rambe1 and Aaron Bere2 1 University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa 2 Central University of Technology, Bloemfontein, South Africa pjoerambe@gmail.com abere@cut.ac.za Abstract: Information and Communication Technologies for Development (ICT4D) discourses in Africa have over‐ emphasised the transformative power of educational technologies (ETs) with limited reality checks on the complexities of technology adoption in resource‐stricken contexts. Such uncritical celebration of ET is often propelled by a modernist paradigm that hails determinist roles of technology in leapfrogging African development and transforming universities. Yet the social embeddedness paradigm challenges this monolithic conception of technology adoption and affirms the situated, contextual nature of technology use. Therefore, this study’s contribution is threefold namely to: 1) Challenge determinist perspectives embodied ICT4D discourses, 2) Exploit social embeddedness paradigm to explore the complex appropriation of emerging networked technologies to support ubiquitous learning 3). Use a case study of WhatsApp, a mobile instant messaging service, to unravel the opportunities, constraints and ambivalences that accompany its academic appropriation at a South African University of Technology. The findings suggest that the opportunities for ubiquitous learning and student engagement with collectively‐generated resources in particular are steeped in ambivalent contexts plagued by student nascent social literacy skills and limited communicative competences. Keywords: social embeddedness, ICT4D, modernist paradigm, mobile instant messaging, collectively generated resources

1. Introduction A persistent theme in ICT4D literature is the catalytic role of ICTs in fostering the economic and social development of emerging economies (Avgerou, 2003; Walsham and Sahay, 2006; Walsham et al., 2007). This modernist perspective rides on assumptions about technology’s capacity to foster increased connectivity, heighten discursive interactions and breach the isolation of populations in remote parts of the world. ICTs are conceived as critical tools for leap frogging developing African countries that are lagging behind. They are touted for their potential to enhance the cross referencing information and bridging information asymmetries (Dobra, 2012), accelerating economic growth and uplifting social conditions (Avgerou, 2003) of developing economies. Despite these positive aspirations about ICTs, literature also highlights disappointing stories of technology failures and dashed hopes (Avgerou and Walsham, 2000; Dobra, 2012). These system failures are attributed to the paucity of corresponding discourses on the diverse ways and situated contexts that shape the assimilation and adoption of technology, albeit complex, social constructions of technology by users. For instance, Sahay and Robey (1996) argue that the realisation of social objectives of technologies is dependent on grasping the nature of social context, its interdependencies with human agency and diverse process of ICT implementation. Local context shapes the human meaning making processes assigned to technology including the multiple interpretations of their diverse applications. This paper contributes towards this discourse by examining: 1). The determinist nature of the ICT4D discourses on Africa, 2). The developmental value of social embeddedness discourse, (3) The complexities of appropriating mobile instant messaging at a South African University of Technology (UoT) to support ubiquitous learning, (4) The implications of adopting this familiar but least exploited technology in African education.

2. Brief literature review 2.1 Mobile learning at South African universities Isaacs (2012) highlights Dunia Moja, a collaborative environmental project between Stanford University and three African universities, which seeks to deploy mobile technologies to support international engagement on environmental science issues. The project employs mobile technologies to increase student communication, access to course materials, enhance study and assignment completion from the “field” (Stanford University,

353

Patient Rambe and Aaron Bere 2009). Kriek, Matthee, Lotriet and Batchelor’s (2010) comparative analysis of the emancipatory value of two mobile learning projects in diverse socio‐economic contexts in South Africa hailed mobile phones for their facilitation of knowledge sharing, explorative learning and context free learning outside the classroom. Hodgkinson‐Williams and Ng’ambi’s (2009) study reports on University of Cape Town organisational psychology lecturers’ use of Dynamic Frequently Asked Questions (DFAQ) for student teaching. This mobile, interface‐based consultative and educational environment supports educator‐student consultations via SMS, provides multiple artifacts for knowledge sharing, and renders peer‐based collaborative learning through anonymous consultations. The next section discusses the ICT discourses in Africa to ensure that the continent’s mobile learning practices are conceived in their proper perspective.

3. Theoretical framework 3.1 Determinist discourses on ICT for development (ICT4D) in Africa The ICT4D discourse in Africa tends to be funneled through determinist ways namely, (1) ICTs as drivers for economic growth in public sectors like education, health and social service provisions (modernist argument), (2) Implications of the ICT4D discourses in Africa for the digital divide (structuralist argument). (3). ICTs’ deep implication in the transformation of social structures and institutions (transformative argument). The modernist argument rest on prescriptive technophilia, which constructs the Western material progress towards modernity as unfolding serially with technology assuming a determining role in that process. The UNDP Report (2001) highlights the positive associations between economic growth and nations’ levels of ICT uptake, with technological change accounting for the differences in growth rates. Microsoft (2009: 3) also foregrounds the sacralisation of ICT in African development particularly its potential to “sustain social and economic opportunity” through “transforming education, fostering local innovation and enabling jobs and opportunities.” For Moodley (2005), the South Africa government’s technocratic discourse on ICT4D is framed by overoptimistic assumptions about the power and valence of ICT in poverty reduction and broad‐based development. Despite this utopian impressions about technology impacts, contradictory evidence on ICT implementation in Africa persists (Chigona and Chigona, 2010; Einhorn 2006). Low ICT adoption rates among educators still prevail in South Africa, notwithstanding the success stories like Khanya Project that equips disadvantaged South African schools with computers and trains educators in ICTs (Chigona and Chigona, 2010). Similarly, ICT diffusion across impoverished African countries unfolds against the backdrop of strong Western capitalist agendas of increasing the market penetration for their technologies and relaxing barriers to entry for these commodities. Einhorn (2006) exposes the hidden economic and political machinations in mega ICT projects supposedly intended for marginalised poor like AMD computer’s targeting of Indian markets and the designing of VIA computer for African markets (cited in Andrade and Urquhart, 2012). The structuralist argument emphasises the capacity of ICTs to breach the divide between technology haves and the digitally marginalised. Mindful of poor connectivity in rural Africa, poor technological infrastructure, and low literacy rates, ICTs’ potential to catapult African nations out of digital exclusion needs substantiation. Consequently, Avgerou (2009) suggests that developing countries are in perceived disadvantage with regard to IS innovation experiences particularly the origin of new technologies and related new organisational models. However, Andrade and Urquhart (2012) critiques the ICT4D discourse for assigning an unrealistic role to technology by assuming that ICT4D users are merely passive recipients of the benefits of technology and that only the most dominant groups in society can usher development. As such, the assumptions about the transfer of technology to developing economies and the parachuting of Western models onto developing countries contexts are misleading and perpetuate an a‐contextual discourse. From a transformative perspective, there is emerging evidence to support the positive association between national ICT uptake and transformation of economies and public institutions (UNDP Report 2001; Ngwenyama, Andoh‐Baidoo, Bollou, and Morawczynski, 2006). Ngwenyama et al’s (2006) study on five West African Francophone countries examined the relationships among investments in ICT, health and education sectors and the human development index. Their study reports that complementary investments in these three sectors can actually improve development. Similarly, the UNDP Report (2001) affirms the positive contribution of ICTs to national development in developing economies.

354

Patient Rambe and Aaron Bere

3.2 Social embeddedness view of ICT4D: An alternative view The social embeddedness view is a social constructionist perspective on technology that critiques the modernity paradigm for downplaying the context and cultural conditions in which technology adoption is often enframed. This alternative perspective conceive IS and [ICT] innovations as socially constructed entities, and therefore, contingent upon their perceived significance and their interplay with human actors and their social institutions (Avgerou, 2009). It describes “the process of innovation in situ, tracing the cognitive, emotional, and political capacities that individuals nurtured in their local social institutions bring to bear on unfolding innovation attempts” (Avgerou 2009: 6). This perspective volarises technologies as socially constructed artifacts deeply embedded in socio‐cultural contexts and whose social impact varies depending on their social and cultural interpretations by agents. As Sahay and Robey (1996: 256) observe, ICTs are subject to social interpretation by actors implementing and using them and these social meanings of technology affect the manner in which they are implemented and used. Similarly, Mansell’s (2005: 93) observes that: “Peoples livelihoods do not change because of technology; they change in the light of the way technology becomes embedded in the overall context of the local and the global.”

4. Research questions

What evidence in student academic use of WhatsApp suggests its context‐driven use and social embeddedness?

Which ubiquitous learning opportunities and associated challenges are encountered in student academic appropriation of mobile technologies?

What are the implications of adopting familiar‐but‐least understood (explored) technologies for IS education.

5. Methodology A case study approach was used to investigate Information Technology (IT) students’ adoption of mobile technology at a South African University of Technology. Case studies are conceivably ideal when researchers “are primarily interested in the meaning subjects give to their life experiences, […] to immerse themselves in the activities of […] people in order to obtain an intimate familiarity with their social worlds” (Fouch`e and Schurink, 2011: 320). An IT lecturer discerned the following in his third year IT class: 1) Low articulation rates, 2). Student enthusiasm about using mobile phones for social interactions and 3). Their limited understanding of how social technologies could be made academically useful. To understand these dynamics, WhatsApp was adopted for lecturer‐student and student‐peer consultation on IT problem solving and academic‐related issues. Overall, WhatsApp interactions were supplemented by lectures, tutorials and the collaborative learning tools embedded in the university’s learning management system called Ethutho.

5.1 Academic application of WhatsApp WhatsApp messenger is a cross‐platform Smartphone messenger that employs users’ existing internet data plan to help them stay connected with their learning community (WhatsApp, 2010). It allows for the formation of engagement clusters of up to 11 people per cluster, supports multimedia interactions, group chatting and unlimited messaging using the users’ existing data plan. The lecturer required students with Web‐enabled phones to download WhatsApp and form consultative clusters (discussion groups) comprising 7‐10 students per cluster in addition to the lecturer. The 8 clusters comprised a total of 77 students who discussed the questions they generated with peers in their respective clusters. Students posed course‐related questions, complaints and queries to their group members in addition to the lecturer. The lecturer also posed one uniform question to all clusters on a typical consultation day.

5.2 Data analysis At the end of the second semester (about seven months), all student postings on WhatsApp groups were downloaded, printed and analysed thematically to make sense of the issues being investigated. Thematic content analysis enabled the construction of meaning from the data. For Taylor‐Powell & Renner (2003), the meaning‐making process involves the identification of themes/patterns, organising them into coherent categories, and identifying other themes that serve as sub‐categories until the researcher has identified and labelled all relevant themes. The codes were developed from the mined data and these “were clustered based

355

Patient Rambe and Aaron Bere on the similarity of ideas and themes, leading to the emergence of core overarching and inter‐related categories” (Isaacs and Hollow, 2012: 12). The themes and categories developed are shown in Table 1. Table 1: Social embeddedness analytical framework Theme Capacities

Category Cognitive Emotional Political Social interpretations Context of use / application Social immersion Physical divide Networked Connectivity Skewed academic networks Multiple classes Cohort heterogeneity

Local Interpretations (of technology) Digital divide

Course load

6. Presentation of findings and discussion The academic appropriation of WhatsApp exposed the different opportunities, complexities, contradictions and unintended effects of technology adoption. These issues are drawn upon and explored under the categories developed in the data analysis section (see Table 1).

6.1 Capacities The use of WhatsApp enhanced the externalisation of three unique capacities namely, cognitive, emotional and political. These capacities were deeply implicated in student self‐expression and information‐seeking behaviour. Table 2: Capacities categories Theme Capacities

Category Cognitive

Emotional

Political

Student and lecturer’s original postings Guys can you pls assit me with question 3 on what ERM of lecturer and student‐the question our lecturer posted on e‐thutho.(student) I think the answer to question 3 is that we need to create a composite entity to bridge relationships […] (peer’s response) Den whr a u? We r failing without yu…wd u have mercy on us pls (student) You wont fail (lecturer) Its already happening (student) Exam scope attached on e‐thutho (lecturer)

Does your timetable reflect that we hv class today? (lecturer) No its says class cancelled (student x) Check yours (student z) Just ansa the que, I hv a reason for asking. Don’t be disrespectful youngman (lecturer) Mr XX am so upset we being taught by this chick called Rose (pseudonym) smthn lyk dat a b.tech student not even …CUT sucks (student)

Researcher comments A learning community is created when peers voluntarily contribute towards collective knowledge building

Student displays emotional distress and cognitive exhaustion about the lecturer’s unavailability during exam preparation The lecturer exercises disciplinary power by reprimanding the disrespectful child. Student is enraged by the student‐teacher who stands in for the lecturer during his absence.

6.1.1 Cognitive capacity Cognitive capacity involved student psychological investment and commitment to engage with academic content and informal academic networks. Since many students had Web‐enabled enabled phones, WhatsApp enabled them to develop and engage in online consultations with the lecturer and peers within their respective clusters. Given the geographical dispersion of off campus students, WhatsApp served as a platform

356

Patient Rambe and Aaron Bere for the extension of the informal learning community that could not otherwise be plausible. This finding supports the view that notwithstanding the extraordinary computing power of high‐end mobile phones, the challenge lies in their pragmatic deployment in learning environments rather than replicating their computing functionalities (Ford and Botha, 2007). The development and extension of the informal learning community through deeper psychological engagement constitutes a pragmatic application of emerging technologies. The informal academic community is self‐evident from student consultations: “Guys can you pls assit me with question 3 on what ERM of lecturer and student‐the question our lecturer posted on e‐thutho” (student). Students employed WhatsApp‐mediated networks to transcend the lecturer by including peers in their informal consultative framework. In an academic environment plagued by limited literature, over‐burdened academic staff, constrained access to the libraries after hours and informal social networks (for off campus students), informal online networks served resourceful learning platforms for quick access to learning materials, prompt feedback and question‐ based consultations. These opportunities created new expectations about mobile social networking in context: “that content can be changed, annotated, commented on and updated, challenging the idea of the ‘authoritative version’, and redefining the concept of publishing itself” (Czerniewicz, 2012: 15). Peer commenting, critique and annotation of content extended the collaborative generation of content among information‐seeking communities. The response to the abovementioned question demonstrates that informal peer networks were useful contact points for academically challenged students: I think the answer to question 3 is that we need to create a composite entity to bridge …relationship…(peer’s response). The diverse, real time responses that students got coupled with opportunities for eliciting elaborations and explanations were critical to the promotion of collaborative knowledge‐generating community. As such, mobile communications deliver just‐in‐time, just‐for‐me access to personalised education different from previous actualisations of PC‐based platforms (Rajasingham, 2011). 6.1.2 Emotional capacity Emotional capacity constitutes student expression of their inner‐most feelings, dispositions and temperament about their academic and social lives at university. WhatsApp “anonymous” communication and informal consultations allowed students to deploy some emotional investment into their interactions. It allowed for the democratic expression of student grievances, disappointments and discontentment about the lecturer’s occasional unavailability during consultations amid impending exams (see lecturer‐student conversion under the emotional category in Table 2) and delays in delivery of exams assessments. Similarly, students also complained about the student‐lecturer who stood in for the lecturer (see the last posting under political category in Table 2). These emotional expressions possibly buttresses Isaacs and Hollow’s (2012) view that technology users are appropriating technology transparently without being aware that technology is present. The pleading “have mercy on us please” and “its (failing) already happening” (see emotional capacity in Table 2) are symptomatic of student frustrations with lecturer’s unavailability at these critical moments where academic support was necessary. The prevalence of such off‐task behavior demonstrates a dire need for online facilitation of discussions. 6.1.3 Political capacity This involved discourses underpinning some power configurations between actors in an interactive context. The discourses conjure the lecturer’s disciplinary authority, students’ right of reply including their potential to regulate discursive interactions. The lecturer’s authoritative power played out in the statements “Just answer the question […]. Don’t be disrespectful” evoke the enactment of academic authority (see political capacity in Table 2). These power‐driven exchanges between the lecturer and students are symptomatic of the perpetual struggle for regulation and influence in fluid spaces. As Rajasingham (2011) suggests, digital immigrants like educators are clinging to traditional instructional methods, exacerbating the misalignment between learners’ expectations [for self‐regulation] and academic institutions’ ability to respond. Students also imposed some authoritative influence on the lecturer’s decision making process and attempted to territorialize control over interactional processes: That would be of great help Mr…What time tomorrow afternoon? (student posting) Just be available tomorrow afternoon (student posting)

357

Patient Rambe and Aaron Bere Those que can cum c me in office frm nw till 2 (lecturer posting) Although the lecturer did not respond directly to these insensitive demands, they conjure the potential of WhatsApp to even out academic hierarchies among participants. These conversations resonate with established claims about the capacity of the read‐write web to challenge and change power relations and authority due to the ease of use of its content authoring tools (Czerniewicz, 2012).

6.2 Local interpretations of technology This theme manifested in three staple expressions of social embeddedness of technology: social interpretation, context of use and social immersion. Table 3: Local interpretations categories Theme Local Interpretati ons

Category Social interpretatio n

Context of use

Social immersion

Student and lecturer’s original postings I believe dis grp was created for us to interact with one anoda. Are you still active guys. Simple tests will do (student) Yep I am (student response) Lol of coz […] student) Mr XX wt u doin aint fair on us.. u creatd ds groups nd nxthin u js kip quite I gt u a sick bt cant u at least typ nd tel us u gtn beta…(student) Sir u gna go 2 skul 2mrw? (student) No, am in cape town wat do u want? (lecturer) Hope you are not auditioning for idols there in da cape (student) How do you kow tht I am here 4 idols. I am gonna be the next SA model (lecturer) You are so ryt sir u a the next SA wooden mic model (student)

Researcher comments WhatsApp is conceived a space for testing student understanding of concepts Social technology’s “interactive” nature depends on users’ social presence, hyper‐communication and willingness to engage. Humorous exchanges are critical for social immersion into productive use of WhatsApp

6.2.1 Social interpretations Social interpretations of technology related to the communicative, interactive and discursive value of technology from the interactants’ perspective. Social technologies are conceivably “social” to the extent they recruit the interactants’ productive engagement, support communication, real time feedback and social presence among communicants. As Rajasingham (2011) suggests, the increased use of mobile phones has created new possibilities for providing learning and the development of education on‐the‐go that offers just‐ in‐time learning in synchronous mode. Off campus students with limited access physical social networks regarded WhatsApp as an ambient space for academic networking (See student postings under social interpretations category in Table 3. The peers’ affirmation of this student’s comments resonates with the value of online networks for geographical‐remote interactants, notwithstanding the fact that social networking effectiveness is a function of student participation in information generation, critical questioning and collaborative engagement. 6.2.2 Context of use The context of use of technology revolved around the social conditions and situated milieu in which the technology was appropriated, adopted and diffused in the course or entire organisation. The educator’s level of involvement, geographical dispersion of off campus students, that many students were Second English language learners and academically challenged constituted the social conditions of WhatsApp adoption. The geographical dispersion of students implied the limited physical interaction among students. Bosch (2012) reiterates that the double articulation of online and mobile media for youth means that in the absence of physical spaces, these virtual spaces become communities of practice and meso‐public spheres. Since WhatsApp served as a vital academic technology for educators to reach out to students, a lecturer’s genuine academic silence online was conceived as “unsociable” and academically counterproductive (see context of use in Table 3). Yet the lecturer’s quietness resonates well with claims that South African educators are overworked and overstretched complicating their willingness to handle more extra‐curricular work (Vosloo, 2007).

358

Patient Rambe and Aaron Bere 6.2.3 Social immersion Social immersion related to the lightweight conversations that were not necessarily academic, which nonetheless laid a foundation for intellectual conversations. Social conversations in mobile environments are conceived as precursors to making deeper assumptions about one another’s identities (UNICEF, 2011: 6) opening up possibilities for mutual engagements. Social immersion related to: humorous social exchanges, informal assessments and motivational speaking. A typical lecturer‐student humorous exchange is articulated (see the first lecturer‐student interaction under social immersion category in Table 3). Although these socialisation processes lacked strong intellectual qualities, they often paved way for productive academic engagement. WhatsApp also provided a discursive space for student evaluation of lectures and mediated lecturers’ teaching of the features of E‐thutho, the university learning management system. For the IT lecturer, social immersion was instrumental in socialising students into the practical, situated appropriation of current technologies and broadening their technological knowledge base.

6.3 Digital divide The digital divide played out in three important respects: the physical divide, limited networked connectivity and skewed social networks after work hours. Table 4: Digital divide categories Theme The digital divide

Category Physical divide

Networked Connectivity

Skewed academic networks

Student and lecturer’s original postings

Researcher comments

I will be n office frm 11:20 to 13:30 (lecturer) Sir m awr dt u at da campus bt I cnt cum cos I liv a bit far. Will it be specified to draw a crows foot ERD, or shud we always draw it in dt form or a UML form? (student)

The physical distance limited off campus students’ access to information. WhatsApp however breached the information access challenge. Lack of airtime constraints the vital connectivity between lecturer and students

I have just send Ntate Mandela R60 airtime to his private number :(cell number given). Please do the right thing and send him yours (Lecturer) Lol sir u ve got jokes (student 1) Those are your numbers (student 1) No they r not my numb, they look alike. Just be a gud citizen. Do yr magic and send R67 instead (lecturer) Sir may u plz cum to skul. We hv sum questions n we nid u. (student R) Am sick (lecturer) Wen u get beta plz cum (student R)

The lecturer is a dependable information source

6.3.1 Physical distance Off campus students always struggled to access lecturer support on academic tasks after hours and WhatsApp bridged the physical and academic divide between these knowledge seekers and knowledge generators (see lecturer‐student engagement under physical divide in Table 4). The student addresses the lecturer’s assumptions about student homogeneity (as on‐campus learners) by stressing her remote location. Her question demonstrates the capacity of technology to breach the constraints of distance and connect communicants in real time. 6.3.2 Networked connectivity The purchase of a networked handheld device creates a fictitious impression about the absence of additional costs of communication afterwards. In reality, hidden costs of communication like the sustained purchase of airtime and payments for charging the phone from a friend’s house persist. Educators sometimes struggled to purchase airtime (see student‐lecturer conversations under networked connectivity in Table 4). As contemporary literature suggests: downloading a streaming video file through YouTube or uploading large

359

Patient Rambe and Aaron Bere quantities of data for storage or processing consume considerable bandwidth (Le Roux and Evans, 2011) just like lecturers’ uploading of photographed IT diagrams (for students) did. 6.3.3 Skewed academic networks These manifested in some students begging the lecturer’s for his online availability to support increased public engagement. Most academically challenged students undoubtedly conceived the lecturer as their most dependable information source. In spite of the Africa’s position as the fastest growing continent with regard [Internet‐based] social networks and mobile‐enhanced cloud computing (Mouyabi, 2012), mobile networks are sub‐optimally exploited due to limited connectivity, limited digital fluency and adaptive application of multimedia content. Table 5: Course load category Theme Course load

Category Multiple classes

Cohort heterogeneity

Student and lecturer’s original postings Does your timetable reflect tht we hv a class today? (lecturer) Yes sir (student) Meet u in class then. Mine is clashing with my new class 4 comp sys (lecturer) Sir normalization is giving me a runaround (student) I will be in office from 11.20 to 13.30 (lecturer). Sir I understand‐ that explains a disjoint constraint referring to it as subtypes dt contain a unique subset of the subtype entity…anybody who cud put dat in simple English pls (student)

Researchers’ comments Multiple classes taught increased educators’ workloads. Students with different levels of understanding Understanding content was further compounded by linguistic difficulties

Two categories existed under course load namely, multiple classes and cohort heterogeneity. Since the lecturer taught multiple classes, his challenge was apportioning his limited time across the different classes. Clashing teaching timetables were typical expressions of time constraints and working with heterogeneous cohorts further compounded this challenge. Classes comprised students with different levels of understanding of English and orientations towards academic engagement (see student‐lecturer postings under cohort heterogeneity).

7. Implications for pedagogy Some students complained about the emotional stress caused by the occasional unavailability of lecturer on WhatsApp particularly during exam preparation. Since genuine reasons like sickness explained his absence, senior students and knowledgeable students can served as group leaders who sustain academic activity during the lecturers’ absence. Alternatively, a frequently asked questions tool could be integrated into WhatsApp to handle generic IT‐related questions. One clear contradiction in WhatsApp usage was limited evidence to support its espoused capacity to even out power differentials between interactants. WhatsApp occasionally accentuated educator’s exercise of disciplinary power through the reprimanding of mpolite students. Establishing the netiquette like clear rules of professional engagement including some evidence of the value of task‐focused online behavior could deepen academic engagement. Limited networked connectivity and skewed social networks were among the constraints of WhatsApp‐ mediated engagement. The automatic loading of institutionally‐sanctioned airtime after hours (for question‐ based consultations) for students and the lecturer would heighten academic interactions and reduce lurking. An honorarium of marks that contribute to the term mark could be awarded to students who actively participate on WhatsApp. Provision of airtime for course‐related interactions could bridge skewed social networks including the provision of background information for sustaining collaborative engagement.

8. Conclusion The research examined WhatsApp‐mediated lecturer‐student and peer‐based interactions to understand the context‐based application of this technology and ubiquitous learning opportunities and constraints occasioned by its adoption. Social constructionist view of technology particularly social embeddedness was used as an interpretive framework for understanding such adoption. Findings suggests that productive use of mobile

360

Patient Rambe and Aaron Bere instant messaging demands a deeper understanding of it’s the social‐cultural conditions, configuration of power relations, the communicative and ICT literacy of interactants. More so, the context of use, students’ interpretations of social technologies and the various divides were all deeply implicated in productive use of these technologies.

References Andrade, A. and Urquhart, C. (2012) “Unveiling the modernity bias: A critical examination of the politics of ICT4D.” Information Technology for Development, Vol.18, No. 4, pp. 281‐292. Avgerou, C. (2008) “Information systems in developing countries: a critical research review.” Journal of Information Technology, Vol. 23, No. pp. 133–146. Avgerou, C. (2009) “Discourses on Innovation and Development in Information Systems in Developing Countries’ Research.” In Byrne, E., Nicholson, B. and Salem, F. (Eds.), Assessing the Contribution of ICT to Development Goals, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Social Implications of Computers in Developing Countries, Dubai, May 26th‐28th, pp. 1‐21. Avgerou, C. (2003) “The link between ICT and economic growth in the discourse of development,” in M. Korpela, M., Montealegro, R., and Poulymenakou, A. (eds.) Organizational Information Systems in the Context of Globalization, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 373–386. Avgerou, C. and Walsham, G. (eds.) (2000) Information Technology in Context: Studies from the perspective of developing countries, London, Ashgate. Bosch, T. (2012) “African youth, identity formation and social media”, In Isaacs, S. and Hollow, D., (eds) 2012. The eLearning Africa 2012 Report, ICWE, Germany, pp. 33. Chigona, A. and Chigona, C. (2010) “An investigation of factors affecting the use of ICT for teaching in the Western Cape schools”, 18th European Conference on Information Systems, pp. 1‐13. Czerniewicz, L. (2012) “Critical content and communication capabilities: Foundational for African education in a digitally‐ mediated age” In Isaacs, S. and Hollow, D., (eds) The eLearning Africa 2012 Report, ICWE, Germany, p. 15. Dobra, A. (2012) “The democratic impact of ICT in Africa” Africa Spectrum, Vol 47, No 1, pp. 73‐88. Einhorn, B. (2006, June 12) “In search of a PC for the people” BusinessWeek, pp. 40–41. Ford, M. and Botha, A. (2007) “MobilED – An Accessible Mobile Learning Platform for Africa?” In Cunningham, P. and Cunningham, M. (Eds) IST‐Africa 2007 Conference Proceedings. IIMC International Information Management Corporation, pp. 1‐10. Fouche’ C. and Schurink, W. (2011) “Qualitative research designs” In De Vos, A., Strydom. H., Fouche’ C., and Delport, C. (Eds) Research at grassroots: For the social sciences and human service professions, Pretoria, Van Schaik Publishers, pp. 307‐327. Hodgkinson‐Williams, C., and Ng’ambi, D. (2009) “Case study 5 mobile learning: A report of the opening scholarship project”, pp. 1‐20. Isaacs, S. and Hollow, D., (eds) (2012) “The eLearning Africa 2012 Report,” CWE: Germany, pp. 1‐56. Isaacs, S. (2012) “Turning on mobile learning: Illustrative Initiatives and Policy Implications in Africa and the Middle East”, UNESCO, pp. 1‐41. Kriek, L., Matthee, M., Lotriet, H. and Batchelor, J. (2010) “Comparing the Emancipatory Value of two South African Mobile Learning Projects,” Proceedings of mLearn2010, Valetta, Malta, pp.176–183. Le Roux, C. and Evans, N. (2011) “Can Cloud Computing bridges the digital divide in South African Secondary Education?” Information Development; Vol. 27, No. 2, pp.109‐116. Mansell, R. (2005) “The fragility of knowledge societies: Ambiguity, cost reduction and access in developing countries”, In Milward‐Oliver, G. (Ed). Maitland+20 fixing the missing link, Bradford on Avon: The Anima Centre, pp. 81‐97. Moodley, S. (2005) “The Promise of E‐Development? A Critical Assessment of the State ICT for Poverty Reduction Disclosure in South Africa,” Perspectives on Global Development and Technology, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp.1‐26. Mouyabi, J. (2012) “E‐learning and m‐learning: Africa’s Search for a Suitable Concept in the Era of Cloud Computing?” International Journal of Social and Human Sciences, pp. 369‐375. Ngwenyama, O., Andoh‐Baidoo, F., Bollou, F., and Morawczynski, O. (2006) “Is there a relationship between ICT, health, education and development: An empirical analysis of five West African countries from 1997‐2003”, The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, Vol. 23, No. 5, 1‐11. Rajasingham, L. (2011) “Will Mobile Learning Bring a Paradigm Shift in Higher Education? Education Research International. pp. 1‐10. Sahay, S., and Robey, D. (1996) “Organizational Context, Social Interpretation, and the Implementation and Consequences of GIS,” Accounting, Management and Information Technologies, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 255‐282. Stanford University (2009) “Dunia Moja ‐ One World” http://duniamoja.stanford.edu/Dunia_Moja/Welcome.html Taylor‐Powell, E. and Renner, M. (2003) “Analysing qualitative data.” University of Wisconsin‐Extension http://learningstore.uwex.edu/assets/pdfs/g3658‐12.pdf The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) (2011) “From ‘What’s your ASLR’ to ‘Do You Wanna Go Private?” UNICEF in collaboration with the Digital Citizen Society, pp. 1‐32. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)(2001). Making New Technologies Work for Human Development, New York: UNDP.

361

Patient Rambe and Aaron Bere Vosloo, S. (2007). Digital Hero Book Project Final Report, December 2007, pp. 1‐31. Walsham, G., Robey, D., and Sahay, S. (2007) “Special issue on information systems in developing countries” MIS Quarterly, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 317–326. Walsham, G. and Sahay, S. (2006) “Research on Information Systems in Developing Countries: Current Landscape and Future Prospects”, Information Technology for Development, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 7–24. WhatsApp. (2010). BlackBerry App World. Retrieved September 17, 2011 [Online] http://appworld.blackberry.com/webstore/content/2360

362

Promoting and Supporting Innovations in e‐Learning in a Traditional Environment Brenda Ravenscroft Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada ravenscr@queensu.ca Abstract: Educational institutions thrive on stability, especially when their identity is founded on a long history and celebrated traditions. Teaching norms and practices are well established, as is the infrastructure that supports them. Change, such as that associated with the rapidly evolving world of technology‐enhanced learning is viewed as disruptive and threatening. Nonetheless, even the most traditional institutions are under pressure to progress. This case study examines a large‐scale course redesign project implemented at a mid‐sized traditional liberal arts university from the perspective of the administrator leading the initiative. The course redesign project has two goals: 1) to enhance student engagement and improve student learning in large, introductory on‐campus courses by redesigning them into blended models; and 2) to attract new distance enrolments by co‐developing the same courses into fully online versions. The study analyses the structure of the project, providing details about approaches taken to encourage instructor involvement and to remove or minimize the barriers presented by the conventional institutional environment. To facilitate buy‐in from instructors, a collaborative and collegial approach is taken, whereby their voluntary involvement is sustained through a high level of pedagogical and technical support. The sustainability of the course redesign itself is ensured through a process that requires full departmental support as well as formal curricular endorsement. The case study also focuses on the institutional policies that have been changed to enable the project (e.g. curriculum), as well as the ways in which other university units—such as IT services, the university library and the registrar’s office—have been integrated into the project in order to support it. Finally, a case is made for the benefits of strategically promoting such a project, both within the university and externally. The project is currently entering its third year and is thriving. Six high enrolment courses from a range of Arts and Science disciplines have been developed into both blended models and fully online courses, and a further five are currently under development. The impact of the project is significant—affecting close to 9,000 student enrolments—and initial results indicate that the project is successful in meeting its goals. The case study therefore offers other traditional institutions considering similar large‐scale projects invaluable insight into the mechanics and approaches to enable successful innovation. Keywords: case study, course redesign, blended, online

1. Introduction Educational institutions thrive on stability, especially when their identity is founded on a long history and celebrated traditions. University rituals and ceremonies are honoured, ivy‐clad buildings are preserved, and the academic culture of distinguished scholars imparting their knowledge and wisdom to their students using the traditional methods is respected, even revered. In this stable environment, teaching norms and practices, as well as the infrastructure that supports them, are not only well established, but reach back deeply into the past. George L. Mehaffy argues that today’s basic model of higher education was created in the 11th century, where “students are the passive recipients of content delivered by experts who lecture” (Mehaffy 2012). For universities, relying heavily on historical educational models means running the risk of venerating the past to a point where it starts to undermine progress. As James Duderstadt warns in his book A University for the st 21 Century, “we must take care not simply to extrapolate from the past, but rather to examine the full range of possibilities for the future” (Duderstadt 2000, p. 13). Mehaffy endorses this view, pointing out that 11th‐ century teaching models are inappropriate for today and do not prepare students for the 21st century. Questioning the status quo is disquieting for traditional institutions since change is viewed as disruptive, and replacing the familiar with the unfamiliar is threatening. However, the demands for institutions of higher education to evolve are increasing, not least as a result of the rapidly evolving world of technology‐enhanced learning. The internet has been integrated into the lives of today’s students in an unprecedented way—from entertainment to information to education—and they expect this to continue when they get to university. The university examined in this case study is model of stability. Founded by Scottish immigrants in Eastern Canada in 1841, its limestone buildings house 22,000 students, primarily undergraduates completing

363

Brenda Ravenscroft traditional liberal arts studies. The institution’s reputation for providing an elite undergraduate education derives primarily from the Faculty of Arts and Science, which accounts for about 60% of the university. The Faculty comprises 30 departments, encompassing the Humanities, Languages, Social Sciences and Natural and Physical Sciences, and offers a wide range of subject concentrations. The current pressures of growing undergraduate enrolments, constraints on physical space and shrinking resources are felt particularly acutely at the first‐year level where nearly 3,000 incoming first‐year Arts and Science students are encouraged to explore courses in any department before selecting a subject of concentration at the end of their first year. As a result, popular introductory courses have very large enrolments, ranging from hundreds of students to nearly two thousand students in a single course. The challenge of engaging students in these large classes and maintaining the high quality learning experience for which the university is renowned is one factor driving the change within the Faculty. Another, more pragmatic challenge is how to further increase enrolment (and revenues) without incurring additional capital and resource costs. The third driver for change comes as much from outside the university as within: the unprecedented acceleration of interest, demand, activity and technological possibilities in online learning. The Canadian context mirrors that of the United States, where approximately 31.3% of university students (6.1 million) took at least one online course in the Fall semester of 2010, up considerably from the 25.3% enrolled in online courses in the Fall semester of 2008 (Allen & Seaman 2011; Parsad & Lewis 2008). Furthermore, there is a growing body of evidence of the effectiveness of both online and blended learning. A 2010 study, involving the systematic search of research literature from 1996 through July 2008, found more than a thousand empirical studies of online learning. A meta‐analysis, conducted on 45 of these studies to compare the effects of online versus face‐to‐face learning, found, for example, that, on average, learning outcomes for students taking blended courses were significantly better than those of students receiving purely face‐to‐face instruction. The mean effect size (+0.35) for these studies was found to be statistically significant (p < .001) (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia & Jones 2010). The first steps along the path to transformation in the Faculty of Arts and Science were small but significant ones taken in 2010 by individual instructors of two courses, whose dissatisfaction with the learning experience students were having in their large first‐year lecture classes led them to experiment with blended models that incorporated e‐learning outside the classroom and focused on active learning within the classroom. At about the same time, the Faculty started to explore the possibility of increasing enrolment (and revenue) without impacting space, and developed a business case to grow distance enrolments by increasing fully online course and program offerings. In 2011 the Faculty made a commitment to an ambitious multi‐year, dual‐purpose course redesign project, in which educational technology would be used both to transform on‐campus courses into blended versions, and to expand online course offerings. This case study examines the structure of the project and discusses ways in which attempts have been made to minimize the barriers and to encourage innovation within the traditional environment.

2. The course redesign project The course redesign project has two goals: 1) to enhance student engagement and improve student learning in large, introductory on‐campus courses by redesigning them into blended models; and 2) to attract new distance enrolments by co‐developing the same courses into fully online versions. The project is funded by the Provost’s Office, and coordinated by the Associate Dean responsible for teaching and learning in the Office of the Faculty of Arts and Science, with assistance from the Continuing and Distance Studies department, which manages fully online course offerings in the Faculty. The primary motivation for developing blended versions of large, introductory courses aligns the project well with the university’s Academic Plan, which places the student learning experience at its centre. By redesigning traditional lecture courses to integrate face‐to‐face learning with online learning in a thoughtful, purposeful and complementary way (Garrison & Vaughan 2008), blended courses can focus on active learning in the classroom, thereby enhancing student engagement and improving learning outcomes. Studies show that engagement is key to learning, with higher levels of student engagement leading to better learning outcomes and superior knowledge retention (Kuh & Associates 2005). Three decades of research lead Pascarella & Terenzini (2005) to the conclusion that a student’s level of engagement in academic tasks and activities has a

364

Brenda Ravenscroft significant positive influence on knowledge acquisition and general cognitive development. Engagement is associated with active learning, which involves not only listening, but also talking, reading, writing, integrating and reflecting (Meyers & Jones 1993); in short, active learners are engaged in doing meaningful activities and thinking about what they are doing (Bonwell & Eison 1991). While each blended course in the project has a unique design, they share common features: they use online materials and resources to deliver fundamental subject information in an interactive way, devote classroom time primarily to collaborative group activities where knowledge and concepts are applied and integrated, and reduce face‐to‐face contact time relative to the traditional version in order to preserve the overall course workload for students. The fully online versions of the courses have a similar structure and pedagogical framework. Each online course uses the same online resources as the blended course and replaces face‐to‐face activities with equivalent online activities and group work—both synchronous and asynchronous—to ensure the two versions of the course have the same learning outcomes. Although the stated goals of the project are different for the blended and fully online versions of the courses, their co‐development enables greater efficiencies and benefits. Both versions of each course are designed to meet the same pedagogical goal of active learning, the online materials are shared between the blended and online courses, and development costs (including instructor stipends and instructional designer support) are reduced. There are currently nine courses in the project, spanning disciplines in the sciences, social sciences and humanities. The majority are foundational first‐year courses, each of which acts as the gateway to a specific concentration, and two are 200‐level elective courses. Enrolments in the blended courses range from 400 to 1,800 students, while fully online versions of the courses have an average enrolment of 100 students.

3. Inviting participation Because the adoption of educational technology is subject to a range of views in a traditional environment such as the one under discussion, including scepticism and outright hostility, participation in the course redesign project is voluntary. Based on a call for proposals put out by the Faculty Office, instructors submit relatively short proposals, outlining in a general way their redesign plans for the course. Rather than providing details of the design at this early stage, proposals are intended to signify a commitment to the project and its goals from both the instructor and their home department. Departmental support is essential in order to avoid the instructor feeling isolated or unsupported in the development process, and to ensure that the course continues to be offered in its redesigned form once other instructors take over. In an analysis of strategies that led to the successful implementation of course redesigns, the National Center for Academic Transformation identifies “collective decision‐making and departmental buy‐in as key factors” (Twigg 2004). Requiring departmental support at the proposal submission phase ensures that the appropriate discussions and approvals have taken place and that the course redesign is likely to be sustained in the future. In addition to having departmental support, the proposals must meet the parameters of the project in order to be considered—the course must be at an introductory level and have a minimum enrolment of 400 students, and the proposal must include developing both a blended and fully online version—and must show evidence that the planned redesign will focus on improving student engagement through the inclusion of active learning components. Because of the long‐term nature and complexity of the project, expectations and responsibilities need to be clearly communicated and recorded. Once proposals have been selected, the instructor(s), the head of the home academic department and the Associate Dean (representing the Faculty) sign a memorandum of agreement articulating expectations, deliverables, available resources and timelines.

4. Supporting instructors Redesigning a course within a traditional environment requires considerable support and training for the instructor, in both the development and implementation phases, in order to overcome the tendency to revert to the “old ways” of doing things (Twigg 2004). In a study examining current scholarship about how to

365

Brenda Ravenscroft promote change in instructional practices, the authors conclude that successful strategies require “coordinated and focused efforts lasting over an extended period of time” (Henderson, Beach & Finkelstein 2011, p. 972). A collaborative approach characterizes the course redesign project under discussion, where instructor involvement is sustained through a high level of pedagogical and technical support. The most direct support provided to instructors is funding to compensate them for the time and effort required to redesign a course. The project pays a development stipend, which either compensates the instructor on an overload basis, or is used by the home department to cover some of the instructor’s teaching while they are relieved of part of their standard workload in order to devote their time to the redesign process. The latter situation is preferable since instructors routinely underestimate the amount of work required to redesign a course, and find it difficult to focus on the project while carrying a standard workload and expending their energies according to the normal rhythms and demands of the academic year. Based on studies indicating that successful shifts in educational practices focus on pairing an individual consultant with an individual educator (Henderson, Beach & Finkelstein 2011), the project pairs each instructor with an instructional designer who provides course design expertise, advising the instructor on best practices, guiding them to design decisions based on evidence in the pedagogical literature, and acting as a project manager for the redesign process. Technical support, a potential barrier to instructor involvement in online education (Muilenburg & Berge 2001), is coordinated by the instructional designer who draws on IT experts as needed. Each instructional designer works one‐on‐one with the instructor, from the earliest stages of the redesign project through to the first deliveries of both the blended on‐campus course and the fully online version. Periodically, meetings are scheduled between the Associate Dean leading the project and the instructor and instructional designer to discuss progress, evaluate support and resolve issues. In their book Blended Learning in Higher Education, Garrison and Vaughan (2008) draw on research studies to discuss the important role of community in developing and sustaining educational transformation. Instead of faculty members working in isolation, which can be both disheartening and inefficient, there is greater value creating a collegial network of instructors with similar interests and goals. To establish such a community, the project under discussion holds regular informal gatherings for all of the instructors involved in course redesign activities. Every three weeks instructors from across the faculty meet to share ideas, work through challenges collaboratively, discuss specific learning strategies, and benefit from guest speakers. An educational technologist with expert knowledge of the university’s learning management system is also part of the group, providing the bridge between learning and the technology that enables it. Enthusiastic instructors, even when supported in the ways described earlier, cannot effect sustained change unless barriers in the surrounding environment are minimized; institutional structures have to be aligned with the change effort (Luft, Kurdziel, Roehrig & Turner 2004; McShannon & Hynes 2005). Creating such an environment means ensuring that policies and practices facilitate the goals of the project, and that university service units recognize and accommodate its needs.

5. Changing institutional policies Taking each redesigned course through the curriculum approval process is key to sustaining the course transformations, and has also led to a curriculum policy change, the benefits of which have extended beyond the course redesign project. Curricular approval formalizes the structure of the blended courses, and ensures that discussion and consultation has taken place. After being approved in the home academic department, the course submission proceeds to the Faculty Curriculum Committee, whose membership includes both students and faculty members from a wide range of disciplines. In addition, the Associate Dean leading the course redesign project is an ex officio member of the Curriculum Committee and is therefore well positioned to shepherd blended course proposals as they move through the approval process. The curriculum policy change mentioned earlier was made the year before the course redesign project was launched when it became apparent that existing systems were well suited to blended courses. Specifically, Arts and Science courses had always been categorized in the Calendar in terms of their contact hours, a system that was clearly inadequate for blended courses that integrated a significant amount of online learning outside the classroom. A subcommittee of the Curriculum Committee was charged with reviewing this practice and seeking a more flexible system that could accommodate different learning models. On their recommendation,

366

Brenda Ravenscroft the Faculty adopted a system of “student learning hours,” where the number of hours on task are approximated for the different learning activities involved in each course, including classroom learning, online learning, private study, and so forth. This change not only enabled the accurate description of blended courses, but was also generally well received as a more progressive and learner‐centred way to describe all courses. Other Faculty policies have been developed to ensure educational quality. For example, a quality framework has been established for fully online courses that follows best practices in terms of structuring the course to highlight interaction: interaction between the student and the materials, interaction between the instructor and the student, and peer interaction (Wenger, McDermott & Snyder 2002; Eklund 1995). Similarly, the goal for online components of blended courses is to be interactive, although instructors have flexibility in terms of the actual materials they select, depending on what is available and most appropriate for their subject matter—publisher’s e‐materials, self‐developed materials, including voice‐over‐slides, podcasts, vodcasts, and so forth. (The project does not endorse a reliance on streamed lecture capture, since this runs the risk of replicating a passive student experience.) Flexibility is also applied to the classroom component of blended courses. It is expected that classroom time will be focused on active learning, but no single learning strategy is recommended. Instead, instructors are encouraged to explore the literature supporting different learning strategies and to select those that best suit their subject matter and learning objectives. Many of the courses have adopted a team‐based learning approach in the classroom, in part because of the robust research in this area.

6. Integrating university units While policies within the Faculty can be changed to enable the success of its initiatives, the alignment of structures across the larger university presents a greater challenge. A large‐scale course redesign project of this nature depends on the integrated support of many different institutional units and therefore one of the roles the project leader has to play is to champion the project’s needs. Public endorsement from the highest levels in the university is critical. The Dean’s promotion of the course redesign project as a Faculty priority has helped to raise its profile across the institution and highlight the need for cooperation from service units. In order to be able to influence the environment and to diminish potential barriers, it is strategically useful for the leader of such a project to be well positioned. In this case study, the Associate Dean holds the position of Chair of the University Timetable Committee and is a member of the University Teaching Space Committee. Involvement in these university committees has ensured that the needs of the course redesign project are discussed at the appropriate levels. As a result, the Timetabling Office has agreed to accommodate unusual timetabling requests associated with blended courses, and the Campus Planning unit has initiated the renovation of underutilized classroom space into flexible space with mobile furniture and adaptable audiovisual infrastructure to enable a range of group learning activities. The Associate Dean is also the Faculty representative on the Educational Technology Advisory Committee, which advises the institution on matters vital to the project such as online policies, learning management systems, software support, and IT needs in classrooms. In addition to representing the course redesign project in these venues and facilitating the process for individual instructors involved in the initiative, the Associate Dean brings together university constituents at different phases of the project. When new courses become part of the project, for example, a meeting is held for the instructors, instructional designers, University Library representatives (subject specialist librarians, e‐ learning and copyright experts), IT Services staff overseeing the learning management system, and members of the Centre for Teaching and Learning in order to introduce everyone and to review the scope and timelines of the project. By familiarizing all of the support units with the project from the start, they are able to respond more effectively to the needs of individual instructors as they arise during the course redesign process.

7. Providing evidence The inevitable skepticism that innovations such as the course redesign project are met with in a traditional university environment emphasizes the need to provide convincing evidence of their value. Publicizing data that support innovative practices might play a role in initiating a cultural shift by challenging one of the most common barriers to change: the existing personal beliefs of faculty members (Henderson, Beach & Finkelstein 2011). Assessing the redesigned courses also allows the project to demonstrate that its goals have been successfully met in order for institutional funding to be renewed. The data generated by individual course

367

Brenda Ravenscroft assessments offer an incentive for faculty members to become engaged in the scholarship of teaching and learning, as well as providing evidence on which to refine and improve their course designs. Leading course redesign advocate Carol Twigg (1999‐2003) stresses the importance of assessment in educational transformation “… the most important lesson that I learned is that a commitment to assessing student learning is fundamental to creating change in teaching and learning.” The project in this case study is being assessed with support from the institution’s Centre for Teaching and Learning and the Office of Institutional Research. Ethics approval has been received for a range of assessments for the whole project; the Associate Dean coordinating the project is the principal investigator and all involved faculty members are included as co‐investigators. Redesigned blended courses are being assessed through the administration of questionnaires to measure students’ perception of engagement and learning, with baseline assessments being completed during the final offering of the traditional version of each course. The classroom adaptation of the NSSE (National Survey of Student Engagement), the CLASSE (Classroom Survey of Student Engagement), developed by Judy Ouimet and Bob Smallwood, is being used to measure engagement, and the revised Study Process Questionnaire (R‐SPQ‐2F) to measure students’ approach learning. The project also has access to academic and demographic data stored in the student data warehouse. Furthermore, some instructors have started pre‐ and post‐testing to measure recall of knowledge and higher‐order thinking skills (Twigg 1999‐2003).

8. Results and future developments The course redesign project is currently in its second year and is thriving. Six high enrolment courses from a range of Arts and Science disciplines have been developed into both blended models and fully online courses, and a further five are currently under development. A third call for proposals has just been made. The impact of the project is significant, affecting close to 9,000 student enrolments, and early indications suggest that the project is meeting its goals. Initial analyses of questionnaire data from 3 courses indicate the presence of a number of statistically significant differences between traditional format and blended formats of these courses. In particular, comparisons of means for subscales labelled active learning in class, higher order thinking skills and student‐faculty interactions indicate that there were greater levels of student engagement in the blended learning format in comparison to the traditional format. (Further analyses and synthesis of results from across various data sources are still underway and will be published when they are available.) Enrolments in fully online courses have increased as a result of the expansion of course offerings, with the number of new distance enrolments, while still relatively small, doubling in the past year. Continuous efforts have been made to raise the profile of the project since its inception, both within the institution and externally. News items have been generated and public presentations made. Partly as a result of these efforts and partly because of the sheer scale of the enterprise and the number of students involved, the course redesign project has become a key feature in both advancement and recruitment activities. Through emphasizing the need for innovative spaces to enable innovative teaching and learning, the university recently acquired over $2 million in donations to create the active learning classrooms discussed earlier. Recruitment efforts have focused on the learning experience gained through group learning activities in first‐ year blended courses, allowing the university to differentiate itself from competitors and placing it at a strategic advantage. As the project grows, it demands increased support from university services, not all of which the institution is able to meet. In particular, there are not enough classroom spaces suitable for active learning, the IT support for both students and instructors is inadequate, the development of features in the learning management system is prohibitively slow, and there is a dearth of both educational technologists and web developers. Another unwanted consequence of the success of the project is the attraction of a small but vocal minority of faculty members who find change, particularly in the form of online learning, threatening. Two years ago the term “blended learning” was virtually unknown at the university in this case study, and most people, including many on the campus, were unaware that the institution offered fully online courses and programs. Today, while not all instructors are convinced of the value of integrating educational technology into their courses and not all students are prepared to be active participants in their own learning, the level of familiarity with blended and online learning is extraordinarily high. A Senate task force has been struck to examine online learning at the university, and the province is in the process of establishing a consortium of

368

Brenda Ravenscroft universities that offer online courses. Other Faculties at the university are seeking advice from the project about blended and online models of course delivery, and demands from students for the flexibility and self‐ paced learning opportunities offered by online activities are steadily rising. Traditional educational institutions are challenged by change and innovation. However, as this case study has shown, by employing the appropriate strategies and approaches the unwieldy institutional ship can gradually start to change course, and the traditions can slowly evolve.

References Allen, I.E. and Seaman, J. (2007) “Online Nation: Five Years of Growth in Online Learning”, [online], The Sloan Consortium, Needham, MA, www.sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/pdf/online_nation.pdf. Bonwell, C.C. and Eison, J.A. (1991) “Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom”, ASHE‐ERIC Higher Education Report No.1. Washington, DC: George Washington University. st Duderstadt, J.D. (2000) A University for the 21 Century, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI. Eklund, J. (1995) “Cognitive Models for Structuring Hypermedia and Implications for Learning from the World Wide Web”, [online], Proceedings of AusWEB 95, http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw95/hypertext/eklund. Garrison, D.R. and Vaughan, N.D. (2008) Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines, Jossey‐Bass, San Francisco, CA. Henderson, C., Beach, A. and Finkelstein, N. (2011) “Facilitating Change in Undergraduate STEM Instructional Practices: An Analytic Review of the Literature”, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 48, No. 8, pp. 952‐984. Kuh, G.D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J.H., Whitt, E.J. and Associates (2005) Student Success in College: Creating Conditions that Matter, Jossey‐Bass, San Francisco, CA. Luft, J., Kurdziel, J.P., Roehig, G., and Turner, J. (2004) “Growing a Garden Without Water: Graduate Teaching Assistants in Introductory Science Courses at a Doctoral/Research Institution”, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 41, pp 211‐233. McShannon, J. and Hynes, P. (2005) “Student Achievement and Retention: Can Professional Development Programs Help Faculty GRASP it?”, Journal of Faculty Development, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 87‐93. Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M. and Jones, K. (2010) “Evaluation of Evidence‐Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta‐Analysis and Review of Online Learning”, Center for Technology in Learning, U.S. Department of Education. Mehaffy, G.L. (2012) “Challenge and Change”, [online], EDUCAUSE Review Online, Vol. 47, Vo. 5, www.educause.edu/ero/article/challenge‐and‐change. Meyers, C., and Jones, T. B. (1993) Promoting Active Learning Strategies for the College Classroom. Jossey‐Bass, San Francisco, CA. Muilenburg, L.Y. and Berge, Z.L. (2001) “Barriers to Distance Education: A Factor‐Analytic Study”, American Journal of Distance Education, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 7‐22. Parsad, P. and Lewis, L. (2008) Distance Education at Degree‐Granting Postsecondary Institutions: 2006‐07, [online], National Center for Education Statistics, Washington, DC, www.nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/9002044.pdf. Pascarelli. E., and Terenzini, P. (2005) How College Affects Students: a Third Decade of Research, Jossey‐Bass, San Francisco, CA. Twigg, C. (1999‐2003) “How essential is assessment?”, [online], Electronic Educational Environment, Spring Quarter 2012, https://eee.uci.edu/news/articles/0406assessment.php. Twigg, C. (2004) Improving Learning and Reducing Costs: Lessons Learned from Round III of the Pew Grant Program in Course Redesign, [online], National Center for Academic Transformation, www.thencat.org/PCR/R3Lessons.html. Wenger, E., McDermott, R. and Snyder, W. (2002) Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge, Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA.

369

Enlightening Mobile Computer Aided Learning Assessment Tool Ahmed Salem Faculty of Engineering, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia azsalem@hotmail.com Abstract: A crucial element in any learning experience design is its assessment. The design is only perceived when its assessment turns successful. The more accurate the assessment is, the clearer the evaluation of the success of the design. However, most assessment processes innately sometimes render fear and/or hesitation at the student side. When this happens, it jeopardizes the assessment and could mislead any corrective measures that may be needed to improve the initial design. In this paper, we propose a new user‐friendly computer aided mobile formative assessment tool that both enlightens the students to improve the mental image they have during the assessment process itself through a probing mechanism and motivates the students to audaciously rethink the answer if needed. This mobile tool is composed of a course questions bank, interactive Quiz system with automated self assessment technique that offers instant feedback and a communication system. It is applied in an Engineering design college level course that is delivered in Active Learning setting. J2ME is used to develop this mobile tool and it is targeting mobile wireless sets that are common among the students nowadays. It can also be used in‐class or online. A study was conducted for two semesters, using qualitative and quantitative methodologies for data collection and interpretation to measure the effect of this tool on both students’ attitudes and performance. Two control groups eighty students strong each, were selected each semester – one is using this tool and the other isn’t – to the experiment. The study showed clear positive effects of this tool on both attitudes and performance in favor of the first group. Keywords: mobile learning, learning experience design, probing, formative assessment, instant feedback

1. Introduction Assessment is an indispensible part of the design of the learning experience (Richlin, Laurie, 2006). It sheds light on how far the students progressed for the teacher and provides them with the appropriate feedback on how good was their performance (Fabry, V. J., et al. (1997)). Assessment is also very important for success of meaningful learning. Wiggins G. (1998) and Dee Fink, L. (2003) distinguished between two types of assessment namely: “audit‐ive” and educative assessments. The first type is just measuring the students learning in a backward look at what was taught. While the second is the assessment that helps the students learn better. Accordingly, how to assess classroom goal structures assumes considerable significance, especially classroom mastery goal structure that is considered highly conducive to learning (Patrick, 2004; Urdan, 2010). The work of (Black, P., 1993, 2010) in formative and summative assessment provided a clear picture of how the needed assessment would look like. He (Black, P., 2010) provided a concise picture of the early study and development, the adopted perspective from 1990 to 2000, and then many other relevant issues. His work sheds light on the sort of assessment for which the first priority in its design and practice is to serve the purpose of promoting pupils’ learning. He classified any assessment activity that can help learning as a formative one only if it provides information to be used as feedback, by teachers, and by students, in assessing themselves and each other, to modify the teaching and learning activities. (Sabina Kleitman, Daniel S.J. Costa, 2013) introduced an interactive formative assessment tool that factors in the student confident in their answer as well as the number of quiz tries they needed. They concluded that, struggling students seem to benefit most from the confidence allocation process than other students, highlighting the important role of meta‐cognitive feedback. To design an educative and formative assessment module, one would need to consider many elements. First issue is to motivate the students for participation. Second interest; is how to make it transparent and enlightening? The third dilemma would be “how to make the students feel and share the responsibility about their education through sharing of power with them?” (Meta‐cognition). The forth goad is “how to make sure it probes every single student’s understanding equally and subjectively?” Instructors and educators go very creative about these four elements and there are many proposals in the literature on what to do. For instance, Kay, Robin H., LeSage Ann, (2009) reviewed the Audience response systems (ARSs) that permit students to answer electronically displayed multiple choice questions using a remote control device. All responses are instantly presented, in chart form, then reviewed and discussed by the instructor and the class. This is qualified for the first issue “Participation”. Also in the same issue there are

370

Ahmed Salem (Bonwell, C. C. & Eison, J. A., 1991), (Ames, C. & Archer, J. , 1988), and (Barry W. McNeill & Lynn Bellamy et. al., 2002). For the second concern “Assessment” examples are (Bean, J. C., & Peterson, D., 1998), (Andrews, J. D. W., 1980), (Anderson, R. S., & Speck, B. W., 1998), and (Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P.,1993). Finally for the third and forth issues, “Share of Power”, and “probing” the examples are (Weimer, Maryellen, 2002) and (Barry W. McNeill, Lynn Bellamy et. al., 2002). Although there are many great ideas in all these resources (Sabina Kleitman, Daniel S.J. Costa, 2013), one was always left with the feel of needing a tool that can address all these four points. Especially that, the forth point, probing; is a time consuming if correctly and frequently done to every single student. Such a tool would prove valuable if it could be automated and made reusable at almost every class. This is because of the fact that, a constant accurate feedback (better yet with probing) is considered one of the essential three sides of the learning triangle that has the other two sides as learning and teaching activities and learning goals (Dee Fink, L., 2003). All these references and many others draw a clear picture of the facets of the needed assessment tool. This paper presents such a Tool. It is designed to interest the students, provide a clear, enlightening (through feedback), and instructive assessment, make the students feel the share of power with their teacher and finally allow for an automated probing for every single student as frequent as needed. We present here the design and implementation of this tool. We also present a comparative study that was conducted over one year on the students at the college level studying an introductory engineering design course. Two control groups were selected where the first is using this tool in and the second is not. The study showed a clear improvement of both the attitude and performance of the first group as detailed in this paper.

2. Probing The importance of deep processing and self‐regulation strategies, and adaptive help‐seeking behaviors in (Grasha, A. F., 1972; Karabenick, S. A., 2004; Karabenick, S. A., et al. 2007) would only materialize through the enforcement academic rigor in the course of probing the student understanding. Crespo, S., (2000) showed that, the analysis of students’ thinking is a resource that can help teachers make informed decisions in their classrooms and improve their practice. Crespo, S., (2002) explored the ways in which teachers should began to interrogate and problematize praising and correcting technique and to consider alternative forms of teacher responses to students’ right and wrong answers such as probing. There are many types of probing techniques (Kelly, M., 2011) such as: Clarification, Puzzlement, Minimal Reinforcement, Minimal Criticism, Reconstruction, Justification, Redirection, and Relational. These probing methods provide teachers with the ability to guide students to either refine or expand on their answers. This assessment tool focuses on the first four types. It is programmed in an interactive quiz system. In the following we present how these four types of probing techniques are implemented in details.

3. Tool’s design and implementation The assessment tool is integrated into The Smart‐Quiz System (SQS) which is developed in Java language J2ME version. This gives it the advantage of being mobile to any Java ready set. Those sets are commonly available to the students nowadays such as laptops, mini e‐machines, (i/A)Pads, and Java ready cell phones. The SQS feeds from the question bank of the course on the course’s server. The server is programmed to offer the quizzes through the SQS in the appropriate classes’ time slot according to the course activities agenda, which is distributed to the students at the first day of the classes. The SQS is offering a user‐friendly graphic user interface and starts by asking the students to insert and verify their personal information. In this process, the students have to fill an electronic checklist of the quiz about checking their readiness and allowing them to submit any bonus granting extra efforts such as research or journal on the quiz subject. Then, the first question shows up with a drop down menu of possible answers for the student to choose from and the process follows as shown in the flow chart in Figure. 1 and explained below. Once the student chose an answer to the question, a verification windows pops up with both the question and the student’s selected answer only together, asking the student to confirm her/his choice. This is where the first probing method comes, the Explanatory or Clarification. This basic technique has teachers trying to get students to further explain or clarify their answer. The tool forces the student to clarify the answer s/he has selected through the verification window as shown in Figure. 2 below.

371

Ahmed Salem

Figure 1 The computer flowchart of the assessment tool.

Figure 2: The Clarification and puzzlement probing techniques in the tool If the student still hesitant they can opt to leave the verification step and go back to rethink about the answer by choosing “No” in the window. This is where the second probing method cones, Puzzlement, Where teachers can get students to further explain by expressing their own lack of understanding of the student's response. The verification window is performing this role when it isolates the selected answer and represents the question and only this answer to student for reconsideration. If s/he is sure, they proceed with the verification and accept their answer by choosing “Yes”. After confirming the answer in the verification window the grade is calculate automatically against the right answer and is reported to the screen. Thus, the student has an instant feedback. If the answer is correct, they get the full grade of this question. If the answer is wrong, the tool reports to the screen also instantly and offers another try at the question with reduced grade as shown in Figure. 3 below. This feedback is crucial pedagogy for the students to help them rethinking the construction of the right representation of their knowledge according to the constructivism theory (Chapman, D. W., 2000), (Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R., 2001), and (Bloom, B. S., & Krathwohl, D. R.,1956). This is where the third method of probing comes, Minimal Reinforcement. Here teachers give students a small amount of encouragement to help move them closer to a correct response. In this way, the students feel like they are supported while the teacher tries to get them close to a well‐phrased response. As the tool would grade the question at the spot, the encouragement is evident if the answer is correct. If the answer is wrong, the tool would omit it and represent the question with the remaining choices for student’s reconsideration with a reduced grade for this question. This is where the forth method of probing comes, Minimal Criticism, where teachers can also help students give better responses by warning them of impending mistakes. As the tool subtracts from the total grade the student can get for the question at hand, the warning is delivered as shown in Figure. 4 left below.

372

Ahmed Salem

Figure 3: The reinforcement probing in the tool. The positive (left) and negative (right)

When the student finishes the quiz, a fully detailed report is written and the total grade it reported automatically to the student’s screen and to the teacher on the system server as shown in Figure. 4 right below. Also, an Excel work sheet is initiated and populated automatically for the grades of all the students in the class. A performance distribution curve is fitted to the histogram of students’ grads. This gives the teacher an instant assessment of the class performance in the quiz.

Figure 4: The minimal criticism instant feedback of the tool for a single question (left) and the whole quiz (right) If the student didn’t pass the quiz, a makeup one is scheduled at a later date as a second chance. This makeup quiz has the same rules except that; the total grade that the student can gain is less than that of the first try.

4. How it works The students have to join a collective pre‐class reading session. This would take place few days before the class where they set in teams. Every team is given the same jigsaw reading exercise. Every member would have to read and thoroughly understand a small portion within a certain time, and then educate his/her fellow team members on this portion. Upon finishing of the jigsaw exercise, the teacher would assess the successfulness of this exercise by asking some members of the team to recap what they were taught by their fellow teammates. If the answers are correct, then the exercise was successful. If not, the teacher would push in the right direction, through probing and motivation without giving the full answer yet, allowing the students try again to refine their jigsaw metal model, until they get the right answers. Every team member would then have to generate two questions. They present their questions to the team and then to the class to omit repeated questions. Upon teacher approval of the questions, the students pair their sets with the server to submit their questions to the questions bank. This reinforces the students’ feel of both belonging and the share of power (Weimer, Maryellen (2002)). The self assessment tool within the quiz system is fully automated and is adjustable to cater for the teacher goals (Wiggins, G., 1998). It can provide as many tries as needed for each quiz question to control the depth of both the probing method and the feedback. This makes it qualified as a formative assessment tool (Black, P., 2010). At every new chance of the same question, the question grade is reduced by a reduction factor the teacher set forth. As an illustration, the teacher may choose to set every question offers five suggested answer choices (C) in the answer drop down menu and three second chances to solve it with a reduction factor (R) of 2 for each. This choice results in the following question grade table.

373

Ahmed Salem Table 1: Grade reduction verses the total answers choices. C = 5 & R = 2 Answer at the first time Answer at the second time Answer at the third time Answer at the fourth time

Question Max. grade Full Grade = 10 Reduced Grade = 10‐2 = 8 Reduced Grade = 8‐2 = 6 this option is not allowed

Answer Choices 5 4 3 0

This provides for adjustment for the target level of learning of the quiz (Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R., 2001). For instance an Analysis level question would have more tries than a Comprehension level question which will still have more tries than a Knowledge level one.

5. Results Two control groups were selected for two semesters where the first is using this tool and the second is not. Each group is almost eighty students strong each semester with total of 156 and 158 for the two groups respectively. They attended an engineering design course targeting the sophomore level student in active Learning setting that calls for constant feedback though ten quizzes each semester. Each quiz is presents seven questions typically except when the student consumes all the time to answer fewer set of questions. The tool was set to allow only one second chance at each question of each quiz. Table 2 below shows the results of the first group that used the tool. The Table shows the quiz name, number of attended students, the total questions number, questions were st nd solved in the first try (1 ), how many were solved at the second try (2 ) and how many were wrong in both tries (W) in its left side, respectively. At the right side are the percentages of these values. Table 2: The results of the ten quizzes of the first group at their first try of each quiz

Students

Questions

1st

2nd

1st %

2nd%

Quiz 1

156

1071

639

213

219

59.7

19.9

20.4

Quiz 2

147

1003

565

176

262

56.3

17.5

26.1

Quiz 3

144

1011

702

140

169

69.4

13.8

16.7

Quiz 4

148

1034

773

136

125

74.8

13.2

12.1

Quiz 5

136

959

718

105

136

74.9

10.9

14.2

Quiz 6

138

969

553

157

259

57.1

16.2

26.7

Quiz 7

135

959

595

150

214

62.0

15.6

22.3

Quiz 8

128

900

499

159

242

55.4

17.7

26.9 22.8

Quiz 9

137

957

588

151

218

61.4

15.8

Quiz 10

136

953

703

117

133

73.8

12.3

14.0

Average

141

982

634

150

198

64.5

15.3

20.2

At the bottom of the right side, it is clear that, the average of questions that students answered correctly at the first try is 64.5% (1st % column). The average they get it right after the second chance is 15.3% (the 2nd %). Finally, the percentage of wrong questions after the second try is only 20.2% (W %). Table 3 below shows the results of the second group that is not using the tool. It has the same fields as Table 2 without the second chance column. Table 3: The results of the ten quizzes of the second group at their first try of each quiz Quiz 1 Quiz 2 Quiz 3 Quiz 4 Quiz 5 Quiz 6 Quiz 7 Quiz 8 Quiz 9 Quiz 10 Average

Students 158 149 149 148 142 139 135 139 137 139 144

Questions 1106 1043 1043 1036 994 973 945 973 959 973 1005

Right 690 531 774 788 558 581 604 584 565 682 635

Wrong 416 512 269 248 436 392 341 389 394 291 369

Right% 62.4 50.9 74.2 76.1 56.2 59.8 63.9 60.0 58.9 70.1 63.2

Wrong% 37.6 49.1 25.8 23.9 43.8 40.2 36.1 40.0 41.1 29.9 36.8

Both Tables 2 and 3 showed that, the total number of the students drops slightly from quiz 1 until the add/drop period of courses is over around quiz 4. It hits almost a plateau after that and so is the total number

374

Ahmed Salem of solved questions by students. It is observed that, around quizzes 6, to 9, in both tables there is a slight drop in both groups performance (in the “1st” and “Right” columns). This is due to the fact that, this is the time where the students are having majors and mid‐terms in their other registered courses. At the bottom of the right side of table 3, it is clear that, the average percentage of questions that students answered correctly at the first try (Right %) is 63.2% which is very close to the first group at table 2 of 64.5%. However, the percentage of wrong questions (Wrong %) in table 3 is 36.8%, almost double that of the first group in table 2 of 20.2%. This shows that, the impact of the formative assessment tool is saving 15.3% of what would be a wrong answer to be a correct one at the second try of the question. This increase in the performance is only due to the formative assessment tool with probing mechanism. According to (Crespo, S., 2002, Dee Fink, L., 2003) this is considered an indicator of better learning. Table 4 below shows the results of the first group with the tool in the makeup quizzes taken by only a subset of the total number of students, those who did not pass the quiz at first time. At the bottom of the right side, it is clear that, the average of questions that students answered correctly at the first try of the question is 62.9% st nd (1 %). The average of question they get it right after the second chance is 15.1% (2 %). The percentage of wrong questions after the second chance is 22.0% (W %). These results are consistent with that of Table 2 as it show improvement of about 15%. This is again a direct impact of using this tool. Table 4: The results of the first group in the ten quizzes second chance

Students

Questions

1st

2nd

1st %

2nd%

Quiz 1 C

525

326

109

62.1

20.8

17.1

Quiz 2 C

599

303

121

175

50.6

20.2

29.2

Quiz 3 C

399

295

73.9

11.3

14.8

Quiz 4 C

252

191

75.8

8.7

15.5

Quiz 5 C

265

148

55.8

14.0

30.2

Quiz 6 C

656

390

110

156

59.5

16.8

23.8

Quiz 7 C

464

295

101

63.6

14.7

21.8

Quiz 8 C

586

350

145

59.7

15.5

24.7

Quiz 9 C

498

292

131

58.6

15.1

26.3

Quiz 10 C

242

169

69.8

14.0

16.1

Average

449

276

102

62.9

15.1

22.0

Table 5 below shows the results of the second group that is not using the tool in the makeup quiz. At the bottom of the right side, it is clear that, the average of questions that students answered correctly at the first try is 64.6% (Right %) which is very close to the first try of this group. Also, the percentage of wrong questions is 35.4% (Wrong %), almost double that of the first group but consistent with this group first try as shown in table 3. Table 5: The results if the second group of the ten quizzes makeup Quiz 1 C Quiz 2 C Quiz 3 C Quiz 4 C Quiz 5 C Quiz 6 C Quiz 7 C Quiz 8 C Quiz 9 C Quiz 10 C Average

Students 74 83 56 36 38 88 66 81 71 35 63

Questions 518 581 392 252 266 616 462 567 497 245 440

Right 329 306 298 194 151 393 298 353 295 172 284

Wrong 189 275 94 58 115 223 164 214 202 73 156

Right% 63.5 52.7 76.0 77.0 56.8 63.8 64.5 62.3 59.4 70.2 64.6

Wrong% 36.5 47.3 24.0 23.0 43.2 36.2 35.5 37.7 40.6 29.8 35.4

6. Discussion Figure 5 below shows the performance of the two groups in solving questions correctly along the vertical axis against the ten quizzes during the semester on the horizontal axis at the first try of the quiz. It is obvious from the Figure that the first group has a higher performance than the second.

375

Ahmed Salem

Figure 5: The percentages of correct answers for both groups in the first try of the ten quizzes. Upper is using the tool and lower isn’t using it Also it shows less deviation in the first group curve around the mean average (around the 80% line) than the second group (around the 60% line). This suggests a better performance and attitude of consistency to the favor of the first group. Figure 6 below shows the performance of the two groups in missing the correct answer along the vertical axis against the ten quizzes on the horizontal axis. It is obvious that the first group has lower mistakes than the second with the average of 15% improvement. Also it shows less variation in the first group curve around the mean average (around 20% line) than the second group around (around 35% line). This suggests a better performance and attitude of uniformity again to favor of the first group.

Figure 6: The percentages of wrong answers for both groups in the ten quizzes. Upper is not using the tool and lower is using it

7. Conclusion In this paper we have presented an automated formative assessment tool that would prove valuable in the design of learning experiences as it implements some probing techniques with instant feedback. It reinforces the feelings of belonging and share of power for the students as they contribute to the questions bank and then go through programmed process of probing of understanding. It also motivates and challenges them by providing a hands‐on interaction, and gives them the needed time, software, and learning experiences environment to construct their own mental image of the information they are exposed to. Such a tool would allow the students to assess their mental model representation and keep modifying it if needed, until it proves to be the right model using the instant feedback module. It provides a great deal of help to students to learn better and approach academic rigor. For the teachers, it shortens the time burden for the probing process as it is done to all students in the same time while they take the computerized quiz, especially for courses with huge number of students. This helps teachers to both prepare and conduct a successful design of the course’s learning experiences and is valuable both for initial design as well as for iterative improvements of the initial design. We presented an analysis for two semesters of the performance and attitude of two control groups of the students each is almost eighty students strong, where one group is using the tool and the other is not. The

376

Ahmed Salem analysis showed improvements for the first group using this tool on both attitudes and performance. We concluded that the improvement of 15% in performance is consistence due to usage of this tool in this course. However, this may vary from one course to another.

References Andrews, J. D. W. (1980, Fall/Winter). The verbal structure of teacher questions: Its impact on class discussion. POD Quarterly, 2(3&4), 129–163. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Addison Wesley Longman. Anderson, R. S., & Speck, B. W. (Eds.). (1998, Summer). Changing the way we grade student performance: Classroom assessment and the new learning paradigm. New Directions for teaching and learning, No. 74. San Francisco: Jossey‐ Bass. Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass. Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 260e267. Barry W. McNeill, Lynn Bellamy, and Veronica A. Burrows, Introduction to Engineering Design The Workbook, Tenth Edition (2002). Technical Editors: Sallie Foster & Don Butler, College of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Arizona State University. Bean, J. C., & Peterson, D. (1998). Grading classroom participation. In R. S. Anderson & B. W. Speck (Eds.), Changing the way we grade student performance: Classroom assessment and the new learning paradigm (pp. 33–40). New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 74. San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass. Black, P. J., (1993). Formative and summative assessment by teachers. Studies in Science Education 21, 49–97. Black, P. J., (2010), Formative Assessment, International Encyclopedia of Education (Third Edition), Pages 359‐364. Bloom, B. S., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The classification of educational goals, by a committee of college and university examiners. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: Longman Green. Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE‐ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1. Washington, DC: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development. Crespo, S., (2000), Seeing more than right and wrong answers: prospective teachers’ interpretations of students’ mathematical work, journal of mathematics teacher education 3: 155–181. Crespo, S., (2002), Praising and correcting: prospective teachers investigate their teacherly talk, Teaching and Teacher Education 18, 739–758. Dee Fink, L., (2003), Creating Significant Learning Experiences, An Integrated Approach to Designing College Courses. by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Fabry, V. J., Eisenbach, R., Curry, R. R., & Golich, V. L. (1997). Thank you for asking: Classroom Assessment Techniques and students’ perceptions of learning. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 8(1), 3–21. Grasha, A. F. (1972). Observations on relating teaching goals to student response styles and classroom methods. American Psychologists, 27, 144–147. Karabenick, S. A. (2004). Perceived achievement goal structure and college student help seeking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 569–581. Karabenick, S. A., Woolley, M. E., Friedel, J. M., Ammon, B. V., Blazevski, J., Bonney, C. R., et al. (2007). Cognitive processing of self‐report items in educational research: Do they think what we mean? Educational Psychologist, 42, 139–151. Kay, Robin H., LeSage Ann, (2009) Examining the benefits and challenges of using audience response systems: A review of the literature, Computers & Education 53, 819–827. Kelly, M., About.com Guide, Educational Probing Techniques: Probing Student Responses. www. Educational‐Probing‐ Techniques.htm Patrick, H. (2004). Re‐examining classroom mastery goal structure. In P. R. Pintrich & M. L. Maehr (Eds.). Advances in motivation: Motivating students, improving schools: The legacy of Carol Midgley (Vol. 13, pp. 233–263). Amsterdam: Elsevier‐JAI. Richlin, Laurie Blueprint for learning: Constructing College courses to facilitate, Assess, and document learning. First Edition, 2006. Published by Stylus Publishing, LLC. Sabina Kleitman, Daniel S.J. Costa, (2013), The role of a novel formative assessment tool (Stats‐mIQ) and individual differences in real‐life academic performance, Learning and Individual Differences, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 3 January 2013. Urdan, T. (2010). The challenges and promise of research on classroom goal structures. In J. Meece & J. Eccles (Eds.). Handbook of Research on Schools, Schooling, and Human development (pp. 92–108). Mahwah, NJ: Routledge. Weimer, Maryellen (2002), Learner‐Centered Teaching Five Key Changes to Practice. Jossey‐Bass. Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative Assessment: Designing Assessments to Inform and Improve Student Performance. San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass.

377

Effective use of Social Networks to Enhance Engagement and Interaction in Microbiology Sibongile Simelane1 and Dorothea Mathudi Dimpe 2 1 Teaching and Learning with Technology, Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria, South Africa 2 Department of Biotechnology & Food Technology, Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria, South Africa simelanes@tut.ac.za dimpedm@tut.ac.za Abstract: In recent years, social network sites (SNSs) have gained popularity and attracted a great number of users. Similarly, in education, lecturers and educators are now looking into using SNSs in teaching and learning as a tool for asynchronous e‐learning or as a platform to share learning material. In fact, SNSs like Facebook and Twitter have been integrated and embraced into the educational environment for communication purposes. The purpose of the investigation on which this article is based was to design and implement technology‐engagement and interactive activities with the integration of social network sites, particularly Facebook, in teaching and learning to improve interaction and engagement. The lecturers’ challenges were the lack of student participation and interaction, designing learning activities that would require students to engage and interact frequently with the study material and the lack of communication between student and lecturer and student and student. This paper reports on the effective use of SNSs to enhance engagement and interaction in Microbiology. Keywords: Facebook, social network sites, engagement, interaction and higher education

1. Introduction Lecturers at higher education institutions are forced to deliver learning content under increasingly difficult circumstances. Roblyer, McDaniel, Webb, Herman and Witty (2010) point out that for decades, the education community have struggled to establish the role innovation technologies should play in effective teaching and learning. In fact, they argue that higher education lecturers are stragglers when it comes to adopting social networks and other technology innovation (Roblyer et al., 2010). Simelane (2008) agrees with the findings by Roblyer et al. (2010) and reports that lecturers remain a major barrier to effective integration and implementation of technologies in higher education. Roblyer et al. (2010) state that students come to higher education knowing how to use newest technologies but they often leave them at the door, since lecturers do not use them in the classroom. Findings in their study (Roblyer et al., 2010) showed that students are willing to use technology but lecturers are not. In this regard, Chuang and Ku (2010) advise lecturers to take into consideration SNSs and to provide feedback to students in an attempt to integrate SNS activities in teaching and learning. Chuang and Ku (2010) mention that lecturers should be conscious of the challenges and benefits of using SNSs in the classroom. Results in their study also revealed that 70% of the participants agree that SNSs can be used as a proper supporting tool for teaching and learning (Chuang and Ku, 2010). The Department of Student Development and Support has identified Microbiology I as a challenge to students at first‐year level. This might be due to the lack of sufficient background of microbiology at high school level. In Grade 11, some sections of Microbiology content are taught in the learning area Life Science. This paper reports on the effective use of SNSs to enhance engagement and interaction in Microbiology. In order to do this, an orientation test in the form of a paper‐based assessment was first conducted to determine what students already knew about Microbiology. The orientation test was also used by the lecturer to distinguish the background knowledge of Microbiology that students had from high school. A pre‐survey was conducted in order to establish student knowledge about Facebook and whether they possessed Facebook accounts. Results obtained from these instruments led to the development and the implementation of Microbiology I @ XXX Facebook group in order to promote engagement and interaction between lecturer and student as well as between student and student. Various activities were conducted on the Facebook group in order to establish the changes in students’ academic performance. This paper also reports on teaching and learning using Facebook and students’ perspectives on the usefulness of Facebook in teaching.

378

Sibongile Simelane and Dorothea Mathudi Dimpe

2. Related work 2.1 Definition of social networks SNSs have proved its capability to enhance the communication between people, and many industries endeavour to capitalise on the power of SNSs (Falaha and Rosmala, 2012). Institutions of higher education are observed as one industry in particular that is best suited to adapt to these new mediums. Falaha and Rosmala (2012) point out that, as social networking has become one of the most common means of communication, most universities internationally and nationally have joined this trend and are beginning to use these technologies to communicate with current and prospective students. Boyd and Ellison (2008) define social network sites as a web‐based service that allows users to:

construct a public or semi‐public profile within a bounded system;

articulate a list of users with whom they share a connections; and

view and navigate their list of connections and those made by others within the system.

According to (Xion and Ching, 2010), SNSs are defined as online spaces that allow users to present themselves, articulate their social networks, and establish and maintain their connections with friends and family. (Xion and Ching, 2010) further state that SNSs allow users to connect with other users with similar interests in an online space, to post their personal information, share photos and communicate with each other (Xion and Ching, 2010). The term “social network site” is used interchangeably with the term “social networking sites” (Boyd and Ellison, 2008, Xion and Ching, 2010). Boyd and Ellison (2008) and Cain and Fox (2009) indicate that social network users primarily communicate with people who are already part of their extended social network and not necessarily to meet new people. Boyd and Ellison (2008) state that one of the powerful features of social network site consists of a visible profile that show and communicate list of friends who are also users of the system. Profiles are unique pages that allow users to complete a form with various questions (Liu, Kalk, Kinney and Orr, 2010). A profile is generated using the answers to these questions such as age, location, interest, profile photo, multimedia content, and religion (Boyd and Ellison, 2008, Liu et al., 2010). Boyd and Ellison further state that Facebook allows users to add applications to enhance their profile.

2.2 Facebook in teaching and learning Facebook was created in early 2004 by Mark Zucherberg, 23, while he was a student at Harvard University (Boyd and Ellison, 2008, Roblyer et al., 2010). By then, Facebook was designed to support uniquely college networks and students at Harvard who had email addresses (Boyd and Ellison, 2008, Roblyer et al., 2010). According to (Guynn, 2012, Facebook, 2012), a report in the Los Angeles Times, showed that Facebook has more than 800 million users worldwide who share everything they do. Guynn (2012) states that Facebook is constantly rolling out new applications (apps) so that users can publish activities on the Facebook pages. Facebook is the most recognisable network with education sector, because it was initially developed for university students (Cain and Fox, 2009). Oradini and Saunders (2007) state that social networking systems have been more considered in higher education in the United Kingdom as more number of young generation made use of Facebook and Myspace. They also mentioned that social networking systems have a capability to deliver a learning platform where the students are at the centre of activities (Oradini and Saunders, 2007). Findings in the study conducted by (Ivala and Gachago, 2012) revealed that all lecturers used Facebook group as an additional teaching and learning tool to face‐to‐ face teaching. They point out that in order to encourage students to participate, Facebook offered other ways of organising learning opportunities (Ivala and Gachago, 2012) Social communication can contribute successfully to learning (Roblyer et al., 2010, Ivala and Gachago, 2012). In the past, key indicators of the quality of online learning were interaction and engagement. Lecturers, when given an opportunity to use social network in the classroom, can create the overall quality of engagement in a course and generate more effective learning environment (Roblyer et al., 2010, Chuang and Ku, 2010). Interaction and engagement between lecturers and students are easily measurable in social network sites. Results from the study by (Roblyer et al., 2010) revealed that 95% of student had Facebook accounts, while

379

Sibongile Simelane and Dorothea Mathudi Dimpe 73% of the lecturers had one. This study also found that students often check their Facebook accounts 1–5 times per day. Results also showed that students communicate much more using Facebook than emails. This study (Roblyer et al., 2010) also revealed that students and lecturers do not use Facebook for educational purposes. It has been pointed out by (Chuang and Ku, 2010) that lecturers and students could share information and communicate with each other outside the classroom using SNSs. Lecturers could interact with students by posting activities such as announcements or set up a question and answer section. Results from their study (Chuang and Ku, 2010) showed that 60% of the participants indicated that they spent too much time on their SNSs, and 80% indicated that they were addicted to it. The results also showed that the biggest advantage of SNSs usage is a lot of interaction, ease of use, instant information sharing, a good networking tool and no time and space limitation (Chuang and Ku, 2010). Gossip and privacy were the main concerns of using SNSs (Chuang and Ku, 2010). Results in their study also showed that SNSs could increase engagement and interaction between students and students as well as between students and lecturers. Recently, the advancement brought by SNSs like Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn implied that it is easily accessible on mobile phones and personal digital assistance (PDA) devices (Chuang and Ku, 2010). Users do not need a computer or laptop with Internet access to use these tools. Mobrand (2011) highlights the advantages that using Facebook have for teaching and learning, such as engaging students in a discussion. Students can easily post and view video clips and pictures or bring the learning environment to students’ social space. Olaniran (2011) is of the opinion that SNSs give an opportunity to enhance and customise teaching and learning in primary, secondary and higher education to meet requirements. He argues that the emerging technologies and SNSs have provided opportunities where developing teaching and learning take place in innovative, creative and engaging learning environment as compared to a traditional teaching and (Olaniran, 2011). In fact, Olaniran (2011) mentions that students who are using technology in teaching and learning are considered to be more proactive than passive students. These students take full control and play an active role in the way they learn or co‐create knowledge. Findings from Lockyer, Dawson and Heathcote (2010) showed significant difference between medical and education students in terms of the use of SNSs tools for teaching and learning. They argue that education students rated job‐related activities such as job networking and marketing skill or research higher than medical students (Lockyer et al., 2010). Results also revealed that Facebook and MySpace was viewed by education students as being more formal learning support, academic staff presence is important to facilitate the SNSs.

2.3 Opportunities and challenges Iva and Gachago, (2012) argue that through its improve interaction and communication between the lecturer and student and student and lecturer Facebook group have a possibilities of enhancing student level of engagement in learning. Facebook can offer opportunities for open‐ended forum and active learning for students. It allows students to spend more time on their studies which leads to deeper understanding of what they are learning. Although opportunities are there in the integration of SNSs in teaching and learning, there are also obstacles in the adoption (Cain and Fox, 2009). Cain and Fox (2009) identify the following challenges: getting lecturers who are willing to accept change and adopt pedagogical approaches that allows student‐contributed learning resources, lack of lecturers acceptance of the new SNSs tools to improve the perceive usefulness and benefit of the applications, increase lecturers’ self‐efficacy with using the tools, students should be educated on the analysis, evaluation and to use primary literature review tactics and not only on retrieval of information which could be incomplete or even incorrect, increase of plagiarism and violation of intellectual property and copyright laws.

3. Methodology 3.1 Participants The participants were 86 first‐year Microbiology 1 students at a university of technology in South Africa. All the students were registered for the National Diploma in Environmental Health where Microbiology 1 is a

380

Sibongile Simelane and Dorothea Mathudi Dimpe prerequisite. One of the prerequisites for the course is that students can proceed to second year without passing the subject but will not be allowed to register for Food and Meat Hygiene and Epidemiology which are major subjects in their programme.

3.2 Instruments and procedure Data was firstly collected using the orientation test in the form of a paper‐based assessment. Secondly, data was also collected using a pre‐survey questionnaire before any teaching of microbiology. Results obtained from these instruments led to the development and the implementation of Microbiology I @ XXX Facebook group. Thirdly, a post‐survey questionnaire about teaching and learning using Facebook and students’ perspectives on the usefulness of the Facebook in teaching was collected after the implementation of Microbiology I @ XXX Facebook group. 3.2.1 Orientation test The orientation test questions were developed by the lecturer. This test consisted of 22 questions. The aim of this test was to determine what students already knew about microbiology. The orientation test was also used by the lecturer to distinguish the background knowledge of microbiology students had from high school. The concepts that were tested were population ecology, biodiversity and classification of microorganisms. The orientation test was conducted before any teaching of the year had taken place. 3.2.2 Pre‐survey questionnaire A pre‐survey questionnaire was administered before any teaching of microbiology. The aim of this questionnaire was to determine students’ biographic information, to establish student knowledge about Facebook and whether they possessed Facebook accounts. The authors developed this questionnaire and it comprised of 11 questions. The first section was about participants’ demographics: age, gender, registration and qualification, which consisted of 5 questions. The second section consisted of 6 questions about Facebook knowledge. Students registered their views on selecting yes or no for two questions. Typical examples from the questionnaire were “Do you have a Facebook account? “and “Can Facebook be used as a classroom tool for learning?” 3.2.3 Microbiology I @ XXX Facebook group Microbiology I @ XXX Facebook group was developed from the results obtained from the orientation test and pre‐survey questionnaire. The Facebook group was implemented in order to promote engagement and interaction between lecturer and student as well as between student and student. Various activities were conducted on the Facebook group in order to establish the changes in participants’ academic performance. 3.2.4 Post‐survey questionnaire A post‐survey questionnaire on teaching and learning using Facebook, assessment for learning as well as students’ perspectives on the usefulness of Facebook was administered. We developed this questionnaire, which comprised of 15 questions. The first section was about teaching and learning using Facebook. This section consisted of 4 questions. The second section consisted of four questions about assessment for learning using Facebook. The last section was about students’ perspectives on the integration of Facebook in teaching and learning. This section consisted of 7 questions. In the first section, participants were requested to provide data about teaching and learning using Facebook where participants registered their view on a 5‐point Likert‐type anchored by 1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = neutral, 4 = disagree and 5 = strongly disagree. In this instance, the aim was to establish how Facebook was used in the teaching and learning environment. For example, participants had to rate the items –

Facebook can be used as a classroom tool for teaching and learning.

Incorporating Facebook in teaching and learning helped me to pay more attention on concepts taught in class.

In the second section, students were requested to register their views on a 5‐point Likert‐type scale 1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = neutral, 4 = disagree and 5 = strongly disagree. In this case, the aim was to gather

381

Sibongile Simelane and Dorothea Mathudi Dimpe students’ views about the use of Facebook as tool to promote assessment for learning. For example students had to rate the items –

Questions that were asked by other participants in the Facebook group helped me to think deeply about the concepts.

Responses provided by other participants in Facebook group motivated me to research and find out more about the subject.

In the third section, students were requested to register their views on a 5‐point Likert‐type scale 1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = neutral, 4 = disagree and 5 = strongly disagree. In this case, the aim was to gather participants’ views about the use of Facebook in teaching and learning. For example students had to rate the items –

I like using Facebook in teaching and learning.

Facebook is not for educational use.

4. Results 4.1 Participants Of the 86 participants who provided all the required information in this study, 49 (57.0%) were female and 34 (39.5%) male. Three (3.5%) students did not return their questionnaires but wrote the orientation test. These three were not included in the study. Participants’ ages ranged between 17 and 24 years (M = 1.54, SD = .525). The results revealed that 70 (81.4%) of the participants indicated that they were registered for the course for the first time, 10 (11.6%) were repeating the course for the first time and 1 (1.2%) student was repeating for the second time. Two (2.5%) of the students did not respond to this question.

4.2 Orientation test In the orientation test, 83 (100%) of the participants wrote the test. The M = 1.13 and SD = .341. In all, 72 (86.7%) passed the orientation test and 11 (13.3%) failed the test.

4.3 Participants’ rating on Facebook knowledge before any teaching Here finding revealed that 67 (80.7%) of the participants have Facebook account and 16 (19.3%) did not have Facebook account. Participants indicated that they checked their Facebook account at various times during the course of the day: 16 (19.3%) checked it once a day, 23 (27.7%) 1–5 times a day, 16 (19.8%) 6–10 times a day, 9 (10.8%) more than 11 times a day, 16 (19.2%) did not own any Facebook account and 2 (2.4%) did not respond to this question. Results showed that one (1.2%) of the participants checked his or her Facebook account for communicating or interacting with friends, while 67 (80.7%) did not respond to this question and 15 (18.1%) did not have a Facebook account. Participants revealed that they had experience of using Facebook and their time frames were as follows: 1–2 years = 21 (25.3%), 3 months to 1 year = 20 (24.1%), more than 2 years = 14 (16.9%), less than 3 months = 13 (15.7%) while 15 (18.1%) students have no experiences of using Facebook. About the use of Facebook in teaching and learning, results showed that 72 (86.7%) participants said Facebook could be used for teaching and learning, while 7 (8.4%) participants denied that Facebook could be used for teaching and learning. Findings showed that participants’ perception on the use of Facebook for teaching and learning. For this question, participants were required to select more than one answer. Of the participants, 56 (67.5%) indicated that they would appreciate the opportunity to connect with the lecturer on Facebook and 50 (60.2%) of the participants said they would appreciate the opportunity to connect with other participants in their class on Facebook. Of the participants, 49 (59.0%) revealed that they would like to know their classmates better. Results also showed that 46 (55.4%) of the participants would like to know what others were engaged with in class activities. Thirteen (15.7%) of the participants indicated that it would be suitable to have learning activities on Facebook. Results also showed that 4 (4.8%) participants revealed that Facebook is not for education use.

4.4 Participants’ opinion of the use of Facebook in teaching and learning Results showed that there were 78 (94.0%) participants who responded to a post‐survey questionnaire about the incorporation of Facebook in teaching and learning, 5 (6.0%) did not return their questionnaires and they were excluded from the analysis. Of these participants, 78 (100%) had Facebook accounts. Of the participants,

382

Sibongile Simelane and Dorothea Mathudi Dimpe 73 (93.6%) indicated that they had signed up for the Microbiology @ XXX Facebook group and 5 (6.4%) participants did not sign up for the group. Most of the participants 61 (78.2%) indicated that they accessed the Facebook group using their mobile phones, and 10 (12.8%) did so in campus computer laboratories, 1 (1.2%) at home and 5 (6.4%) participants did not respond to this question. Results also showed that 45 (57.6%) of the participants strongly agreed and agreed that Facebook could be used as a classroom tool for teaching, 23 (29.5%) participants were neutral and 10 (12.3%) disagreed and strongly disagreed. Results also showed that incorporating Facebook in teaching and learning helped participants to pay more attention on concepts taught in class, 42 (53.8%) participants strongly agreed and agreed, 23 (29.5%) participants were neutral and 10 (12.3%) disagreed and strongly disagreed. Of the participants, 60 (76.9%) strongly agreed and agreed that Facebook increases interaction and engagement between lecturer and students, 12 (15.4%) were neutral and 6 (7.6%) disagreed. Results showed that 56 participants 56 (71.7%) strongly agreed and agreed that questions that were asked by other participants in the Facebook group helped them think deeply about the concepts, 14 (17.9%) participants were neutral and 4 (5.1%) participants disagreed. The results showed that 42 (53.8%) strongly agreed and agreed that they liked using Facebook for teaching and learning, and 20 (25.6%) of the participants were neutral while 16 (20.5%) participants strongly disagreed and disagreed. Results also showed that 13 (16.6%) of the participants disliked using Facebook for teaching and learning and 16 (20.5%) participants were neutral while 49 (62.8%) of the participants strongly disagreed and disagreed.

4.5 Gender difference in Facebook for teaching and learning To determine if whether there was significant difference between the mean scores of female and males in respect to the use of Facebook for teaching and learning, t‐test was used. Based on the results indicated in Table 1, this study has found that the gender do not play a significant role in influencing the usefulness of Facebook in teaching and learning. Both females and males were found to be neutral (M ranging from 1.61 ‐ 2.75 and SD ranging from .774 – 1.479), t (73 ‐ 75) = .543 ‐ 1.100, p = .275 ‐ .616, α = .05. These findings corroborate previous studies (Xion and Ching, 2010), which found no significant difference between the gender in the perceived usefulness of using SNSs in teaching and learning. Table 1: Mean scores on the influence of gender towards Facebook for teaching and learning and t‐test results. FBT1 FBT 2 FBT 3 FBT 4 Mean Female (n=48) 2.17 2.56 1.92 1.61 Male (n= 29) 2.48 2.72 1.69 1.72 SD Female 1.038 .987 1.182 .774 Male 1.479 1.131 1.004 1.066 t‐test t 1.100 .659 .898 .5.43 Sig.(2 tailed) .275 .512 .372 .616

4.6 Facebook to enhance assessment for learning In this study Facebook was also integrated to enhanced assessment for learning. Here the findings indicate that 77 (89.5%) participants responded to that AL1 question and results show that AL1, 1 (1.3%), AL2, 2 (2.6%), AL3, 3 (3.8%) and AL4, 4 (5.1%) did not respond to the question. Table 2 below shows that the majority of the participants thought that Facebook have a positive impact in motivating them to engage, communicate, discuss, participate and interact more when there were questions asked by the lecturer or students in a group. Table 2: The participants rating on Facebook to enhance assessment for learning Item AL1 AL2 AL3 AL4

Strongly agree 25 (32.1%) 19 (24.4%) 10 (12.8%) 15 (19.2%)

Agree

Neutral

31 (39.7%) 28 (35.9%) 27 (34.6%) 25 (32.1%)

14 (17.9%) 24 (30.8%) 24 (30.8%) 23 (29.5%)

Strongly Disagree disagree 4 (5.1%) 3 (3.8%) 3 (3.8%) 2 (2.6%) 4 (5.1%) 10 (12.8%) 5 (6.4%) 6 (7.7%)

5. Conclusions In conclusion, we have observed in this study how the lecturer took advantage of participants technology (mobile phone with Internet connection) to effectively integrate Facebook to promote learning, engagement, interaction and participation among students. This contradicts Roblyer et al.’s (2010) findings that students in higher education understand and use the latest technologies, but lecturers do not use them. It was crucial in

383

Sibongile Simelane and Dorothea Mathudi Dimpe this study, firstly, to determine participants’ background knowledge of microbiology in order for the lecturer to know at which level to pitch the learning material. We have observed from the results that participants’ background knowledge of the subject was satisfactory, but the major concern was participants who had failed the orientation test and those who did not have Facebook accounts. We also observed an increase in the number of participants who signed up for the Facebook group. Participants believed that Facebook could be incorporated in teaching and learning. Activities and examples of concepts in the form of graphics, videos and relevant websites contributed positively to participants’ learning. Participants’ reported that they did not rely solely on the textbook and the lecturer’s notes but they learned to find information on their own and shared it with other participants on Facebook. The important feature of this study was that activities on Facebook group promoted a student‐ centred approach, because in most cases, participants took full control of the group and they were asking questions and responding to one another. It was easy for participants in this study to use Facebook technology, because they owned mobile phones and they could use it in their own time and space (Chuang and Ku, 2010). The lecturer also posted questions, which triggered participants’ thinking skills. These activities played a major role in promoting engagement, interaction and immediate information sharing more effectively on Facebook than in a traditional classroom environment. The Microbiology Facebook group caters for all the students in class and no one who was left behind except for those who did not join the group. Engagement, interaction and active participation are important in teaching and learning. The approach behind the Microbiology group permits, enhances and encourages engagement and interaction.

6. Limitations The limitations of this study were that it focused only on one microbiology class group with 83 students. While we would have preferred to work with 86 students, 3 students did not respond to the questionnaire because the study was voluntarily. Students were permitted to fully participate in formal class activities including Facebook‐facilitated lectures without being required to complete any research instruments. Some of the students did not have Facebook account and they did not sign up for the Microbiology @XXX Facebook group. Facebook group was not used formally; there were no structured questions and activities that required students to logon to the group. No marks or incentive for participation in a Facebook group. Students had to provide their own technology in order to access Facebook.

7. Recommendation Based on the findings reported here, it is recommended that a further study be conducted where the lecturer will provide weekly activities that will require students to participate and interact with one another and the learning content. It is crucial to ensure that all students have access to the technology before it can be implemented. It is important to have scores attached to the Facebook activities and these scores should contribute towards students’ predicate mark.

Reference Boyd, D. M. & Ellison, B. N. (2008) "Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship", Journal of Computer‐ Mediated Communication, Vol. 13, pp 21‐23. Cain, J. & Fox, B. I. (2009) "Web 2.0 and pharmacy education", American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, Vol. 73, pp 1‐11. Chuang, H. Y. & Ku, H. Y. (2010) "Users’ attitudes and perceptions toward online social networking tools", In: Dodge, D. G. B., ed. Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference AACE. Facebook. (2012) "Facebook ads", [Online], Los Angeles: Facebook.com, www.facebook.com. Falaha & Rosmala, D. (2012) "Study of social networking usage in higher education environment", ELSEVIER: Procedia Social and Behavioural Science, Vol. 67, pp 156‐166. Guynn, J. (2012) Facebook encourages users to share more by adding new apps, Times. Ivala, E. & Gachago, D. (2012) "Social media for enhancing student engagement: The use of Facebook and blogs at a university of technology", SAJHE, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp 152‐167. Liu, M., Kalk, D., Kinney, L. & Orr, G. (2010) "How web 2.0 technologies are used in higher education: An updated review of literature", In: Sanchez, J. & Zhang, K., eds. Proceedings of World Conference on E‐Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2010 (pp. 2604‐2615). : AACE. Chesapeake, VA. Lockyer, L., Dawson, S. & Heathcote, E. (2010) "Web 2.0 in Higher Education: blurring social networks and learning networks.", World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications ChesapeakeVA: AACE. Mobrand, E. (2011) "Facebook for teaching and learning", Technology in Pedagogy Vol. 1, pp 1‐4.

384

Sibongile Simelane and Dorothea Mathudi Dimpe Olaniran, B. A. (2011) "Designing functional virtual learning communities using the Bola Ola method", Knowledge Management & e‐Learning: An International Journal (KM&EL), Vol. 3, No. 4, pp 697‐710. Oradini, F. & Saunders, G. (2007). The use of social networking by students and staff in higher education. London: University of Westminster. Roblyer, M. D., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J. & Witty, J. V. (2010) "Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites", Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 10, pp 134‐140. Simelane, S. (2008) Success indicators and barriers in implementing technology‐enhanced modules during the professional development programme, MEd in Educational Technology MEd Dissertation, Tshwane University of Technology. Xion, E. T. & Ching, Y. L. (2010) "The perception and acceptance of students towards using social networking sites in teaching and learning", In: Abas, Z., ed. Proceedings of Global Learn Asia Pacific. AACE.

385

Dooyeweerd is Watching you: Using Instant Messaging to Prepare for Assessment Imelda Smit and Roelien Goede Information Technology, Economic Sciences and Information Technology, North‐West University, Vanderbijlpark, South Africa Imelda.Smit@nwu.ac.za Roelien.Goede@nwu.ac.za Abstract: In an Information Technology course, learners are expected to learn about the use of technology. They need to be able to program, do mathematics and statistics, and should also have other technical subjects. Although learners sometimes struggle with the logical thinking necessary for becoming a good programmer, the ones who grasp programming easily, tend to struggle with the different approach necessary for a subject like Systems Analysis and Design (SAD). Learners are confronted with overwhelming amount of theoretical material that is often repeated in different contexts – something which confuses them. They are also sometimes overwhelmed by the use of a textbook which covers extensive material. Bearing this in mind, this study sought to use Social Networking Sites (SNS) and Instant Messaging (IM) to assist students in preparing for their examination. Interpretive research is used to qualitatively analyse the communication between the lecturer and students and also among the students themselves. Along with the identification of themes in this communication, the fifteen modal aspects introduced by the Dutch philosopher, Herman Dooyeweerd, are used to analyse and understand the use and value of mobile technology in an educational context. Keywords: social networking sites (SNS), instant messaging (IM), WhatsApp, MXit, blackberry messenger (BBM), Dooyeweerdian philosophy

1. Introduction and aim In an environment where resources are limited and students come from diverse and mostly disadvantaged backgrounds, lecturers are expected to find ways to help students enhance their learning. When the subject field is Information Technology (IT), the situation is even worse, especially when some students have access to their own computers while others do not. Within a subject like Systems Analysis and Design (SAD), certain module outcomes, such as those addressing an overload of new material in combination with a practical group system implementation, as well as acquiring new skills, and building solid relationships with both business users and technical staff, overwhelm students. This is because most students prefer the rigour of writing a program to the fuzziness of determining the needs of business people. In this context, it was decided to make use of cell phones because most students already have access to this technology – even those from disadvantages communities. Social Networking Sites (SNS) with Instant Messaging (IM) were used with the cell phones, since they are also used by most students to chat socially and as an informal way of supporting their academic life. This is a very economical method to communicate with students and to help students establish and be part of a peer support network that can introduce ways to enhance their learning. An initial project used the same technology to send students explanations of important concepts in the subject. Students complained that the material was already covered and that more in‐depth explanations would be more helpful. This led to the initiation of a project supporting students’ examination preparation. This paper aims to investigate the use of the modal aspects as developed by Dooyeweerd to achieve a greater understanding of this intervention, while providing the grounding necessary for further research.

2. Literature review and context As cell phone technology was used in this intervention, the next section addresses its definition and background. SNS with the use of IM as the software environment supporting the technology is also discussed. The research is placed in context and two issues are highlighted.

386

Imelda Smit and Roelien Goede

2.1 Cell phones As a vehicle to carry the material to support university students in their SAD examination preparation, the use of mobile technology forms an integral part of the study. According to the Oxford English Dictionary (2010), the word mobile as an adjective is “capable of” or “characterised by movement, not fixed”. A device is thought of as an appliance, and, when referring to a small device, the term gadget is used. Device, though, has various meanings the most interesting and applicable of which relates to the context of telephones: “familiar conversation, talk, chat”. As a subset of digital technology, a mobile device is a computing device that is potable and is small enough to be hand‐held (it is therefore light in weight). Feature phones, smartphones and tablets can be grouped under the category of devices. The word phone can be defined as “a telephone apparatus; a telephone receiver or handset”, but it can also refer to “a speech sound, the smallest unit of sound in speech that can be distinguished from any other such unit”. The word cellular (or cell) refers to a mobile radio‐telephone system, in which the area served is subdivided into ‘cells’ ... each with one or more of its own short‐range transmitter/receiver towers linked to an automated switching centre. In addition to making phone calls, these devices can also send text messages through short messaging services (SMS), provide a multimedia messaging service (MMS), send email, have Internet access, allow short‐range wireless communication like Bluetooth, run various applications, supply gaming opportunities, provide photographic capabilities, play music and provide storage space. According to Tullet (2012), smartphones are high‐end devices, while feature phones are low‐end devices. There is no official definition to distinguish the two categories from each other however the price for each device provides a relative indication of the difference. Originally, smartphones meant cell phones with more characteristics or features than "dumb" cell phones; but the two categories are not mutually exclusive. Smartphone is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary (2010) as a noun that refers to “any of various telephones enhanced with computer technology,” it is “a type of cell phone which incorporates the functions of a palmtop computer”. Heeks (2009) states that only around 2% of the global bottom billion citizens (the fourth world who live in sub‐ Saharan Africa, Central Asia and are poorer in 2000 than in 1970) were cell phone subscribers in 2000, a figure which increased by one fifth in 2009. In addition, more than half these people were able to access a mobile telephone through neighbours, relatives and local call sellers. It is estimated that cellular telephones usage rates in these disadvantaged countries might be 80% higher than that of developing countries’ populations (Heeks, 2010). This rate continues to grow and it is estimated that in 2013, more than 90% of the sub‐Saharan population will be within cellular telephone coverage (Denton, 2008). In the South African context, research shows that South Africa is one of the leading countries in terms of growth in access to mobile cellular technology (Kearney, 2011). This is illustrated in a comparison of the estimated increase in cell phone subscriptions between 2005 (71.06 per 100 people) and 2010 (100.48 per 100 people) (UNCTAD, 2011). This growth is even more extraordinary when compared to fixed‐line telephone growth in South Africa, which is stagnant (Kearney, 2011). According to Hamel (2010), 75% of the more than 4 billion mobile telephone subscriptions globally, are in developing countries. To this Hamel (2010) adds that mobile technology has the potential to empower its users to do business. The discussion above demonstrates that South Africa’s development in mobile technology is similar to other developing countries, where access is very good. In the case of the Vaal Triangle Campus of the North‐West University, 1780 (30%) of the 6000 students cannot afford tuition and therefore rely on financial support from the government. Consequently few students can afford laptops, but more than 95% have cell phones. Social media can be accessed through a variety of devices – the most common and freely‐available of which is cell phones.

2.2 Social networking sites and instant messaging SNS use mobile messenger applications that run across platforms and use the existing Internet data of the mobile device, therefore incurring very little cost. This is opposed to short messaging services (SMS), an older messenger application with limited functionality and high cost when compared to SNS. Mobile technology has

387

Imelda Smit and Roelien Goede taken SMS to another level with the provision of free SNS tools such as WhatsApp and BlackBerry Messenger (BBM). The emergence of social media has created opportunities to establish peer‐support networks outside the classroom and without the constraints of geographical dispersion. Although research supports the notion that social media can be utilised to develop student‐to‐student and student‐to‐lecturer connections; during instruction, the pattern still often takes the form of questions to, and responses from lecturers (Wilson & Whitelock, 1998; Rada, 1998; Trushell, Reymond & Burrell, 1998), hardly an improvement on traditional face‐ to‐face instruction. Without an integrated strategy the use of SNS during instruction can still be unplanned, random interactions that do not contribute to constructive learning. Several potential advantages of the use of SNS in learning have been identified. The greatest of these is that factors that normally hinder collaboration and group work are minimized when using this technology. Irrespective of geographical distances, students are able to interact with their lecturers and classmates, both synchronously and asynchronously. The disadvantages of online discussions emerged through other studies. A study by Anderson and Kanuka (1997) reported that some participants found the limited social interaction and negotiated meaning of the online learning environment less satisfying than the face‐to‐face format. Dozier (2001) found a lack of flow in dialogue and the absence of nonverbal communication, such as facial expressions and gestures that occur in face‐to‐face contact, limited the strength of discussions. Romeo (2001) found that some students were intimidated by having to put their thoughts in writing. Encouraging research (Timmis, 2012) reports that students make use of emoticons, for example “:D” or “ ” to show emotion and back‐channelling, while small verbalisations like “lol” (which means “laugh out loud”) or “yea” are used to maintain conversational flow and demonstrate understanding – enabling the student to build rapport and establish common ground. Research conducted by Ellison, Steinfield and Lampe (2007) revealed that most students preferred to use SNS for social, informal, peer‐to‐peer discussions rather than for formal communication with lecturers. Teclehaimanot and Hickman (2011) found that students in general, and female students in particular, do not find active behaviour from lecturers appropriate on Facebook. Active behaviour is represented by communication, while passive behaviour would be looking at a profile, but not communicating. Also, it appears that SNS can possibly work better in certain learning situations than others. From the above it is clear that the use of SNS varies and one can therefore conclude that unless it is integrated as part of a teaching strategy, little educational benefit is bound to take place.

2.3 Context of the research The course offering relied on conventional classes, supported by a Learning and Collaboration Management System (an open source Sakai development used by the university). Students were expected to come to class prepared. Classes commenced with baseline assessment, followed by class discussions and the completion of assignments in class, all of which were facilitated by the lecturer. A practical project spanned the full year and students applied concepts covered weekly to develop a practical system. Individual as well as group assignments formed part of the course structure. The focus of assignments was to encourage students to actively participate in the learning process. The group project and some of the group assignments (towards the end of the semester) allowed students to learn collaboratively. During class various strategies and forms of media were used to accommodate different learning styles. A bonus‐mark scheme was implemented to encourage students to read beyond the prescribed course material. The learning outcomes on NQF level 5 were covered, which the student should master at the end of these modules, includes: knowledge of and insight into the phases and techniques of the SAD Life Cycle to apply this to the planning, analysis and design of a system; skills – being able to apply the phases and techniques of systems analysis, design and techniques of systems development in a project team, manage a project and apply creative skills when they develop a computerised system; and attitude – awareness of treating system information with confidentiality, using resources ethically and responsibly and the fact that systems are developed for consumers and their preferences and requirements have to be addressed during the analysis, design and development process.

388

Imelda Smit and Roelien Goede The framework for the application of system thinking forms the backbone of the course. This is a hypothetical methodology used throughout the course to demonstrate a representative systems development process. Students were also introduced to alternative routes and strategies like the waterfall development approach, the iterative development approach, model‐driven development and the rapid development strategy. The second semester had a stronger focus on self‐directed learning, and reverse instruction (or flipped instruction) was used. A depiction of the instructional strategy is shown in Figure 1. Semester 1: Analysis

Weekly

Semester 2: Design (and Implementation)

Prepare for class: study guide, homework, videos, slides, text book

Weekly

eFundi uploads

Class: class test, class work, explanation

Prepare for class: study guide, homework, videos, slides, text book

Practical group project

Forum, ? glossary, mobile communication

Assignment: version 2 Forum, ? glossary, mobile communication

Assignment: version 1

Assignment: individual or in groups

Evolve

Class: class test, class work, explanation

Notes: Bubbles with stars indicate assessments contributing to the participation mark. Semester Test (not shown in the depiction) are written every few weeks (3 per semester) and make up the remaining marks (50% in semester 1 and 40% in semester 2). Strict guidelines were established regarding the allocation of questions according to Bloom’s taxonomy. During semester 1 forum and glossary contributions were evaluated to improve low scores for assignments/class tests. Examinations take the format of a first opportunity and a second opportunity if the first is failed. Both the paticipation mark and examination mark have a weight of 50%. Examination questions are drawn from semester tests, class tests, assignments / class work, homework and videos.

Figure 1: Systems analysis and design – instructional design Issues that will be addressed in this research After looking at mobile technology and its use in IM and SNS, and how it can be helpful in preparing SAD students for their examination, issues prevalent in this research, need to be discussed. Diversity within the learning environment and unexpected uses of the technology are two issues that will be discussed. 2.3.1 Diversity issues Many issues related to diversity came to the fore in this research project. Although it may be possible to have diversity in terms of the cultures of students, the availability and diversity of mobile devices was challenging. 2.3.2 Unexpected uses The research intended students to use cell phones to help them to prepare for and pass an examination, but is it unsure whether this is all they gained from the intervention. There are a plethora of possible uses that can arise when using the cell phone available to a student in a project like this. Students may start using other features of the device like the camera, SMS capabilities, cheaper IM capabilities. Additionally a cell phone is a mini computer with database capabilities (a contact list), and this may have some or other value for the study. Since students and especially IT students are known for loving technology and especially mobile technology, it was hoped that many unexpected uses would evolve during this project.

389

Imelda Smit and Roelien Goede

3. Philosophical framework Herman Dooyeweerd (1894–1977) proposed a framework for theoretical thinking in which he discussed fifteen modal aspects of reality. Dooyeweerd (1969:4) argues that it is possible to describe all aspects of reality in terms of these fifteen aspects. Table 1 these fifteen aspects are listed as types of things by qualifying aspect. Table 1: The fifteen modal aspects of reality identified by Dooyeweerd; listed as types of things by qualifying aspect (as discussed by Basden 2008: 25); and usage of SNS to supply peer support in examination preparation Aspect

Example things

Quantitative

Amount, Proportion

Spatial

Shape, Distance, Angle, Direction

Kinematic

Path or route, Flow Solids, Fluids, Gases;, Energy, Waves, Particles, Materials, Fields, Forces Plants; Organism, Organ, Tissue, Cell; Animals Sound, Colour, Feeling, Emotion, Excitation Concepts; Distinctions, Deductions, Awareness Goal, Achievement, Forming, Will, Tool, Skill

Physical Biotic Psychic Analytic Formative Lingual

Word, Sentence, Book, Writing, Utterance, Diagram, Index

Social

Friendship, Institution, Status, Respect

Economic Aesthetic Juridical

Resource, Limit, Production & consumption, Money, Management Music, Sculpture, Cuisine, Humour, Fun, Sport, Nuance Responsibility & rights, Reward & punishment, Laws

Ethical

Act of generosity, Sacrifice

Pistic

Religions, Ideologies; Faith, Trust, Loyalty, Worship, Commitment, Ritual

Usage of SNS (WhatsApp, MXit and BBM) to prepare for an examination Number of participants, size of groups, number of groups, number of questions, number of answers, cost of participation (for phone and air time) Shape of mobile device, space you are in when using the device, size of messages, diagrams Movement while using the device (typing, reading) Capacity of mobile device, capacity of SNS Interruptions hinders study progress, Interruptions motivate much needed break from studies How do users feel about using SNS for studying Get answers to questions Structuring of sentences and diagrams Communicate with lecturer/student, explaining questions by lecturer/students, opportunity for students to understand work better Enhance relationship between lecturer and students and between students, having fun while studying, comparing progress of studying; how messages are sent (individual or in groups) Using the mobile technology resources; clarity of pictures sent Style of SNS user interface (UI) Addressing actual student study needs Give students what they need as they need it while preparing for the examination A shared goal to ensure a pass opportunity for the student and a good pass rate for the lecturer

4. Empirical study 4.1 Research design According to Myers (2011), various ways exist to classify research methodology. One of the most common ways is a distinction between quantitative and qualitative research. Quantitative research was developed to study natural phenomena, mostly in the natural sciences environment. Some quantitative methods used in the social sciences include survey methods and numerical methods. The reason for doing qualitative research, as opposed to quantitative research, stems from the fact that there is one aspect that distinguishes humans from the natural world – our ability to talk. The goal of qualitative research methods is to build a reality from the multiple realities of participants, and qualitative research methods are specifically designed to assist researchers in understanding people, as well as the social and cultural contexts in which they live (Creswell, 1998). Although researchers will in most cases use either quantitative or qualitative research, some researchers have combined these research methods in one study, allowing the corroboration of findings and enhancing the validity thereof.

390

Imelda Smit and Roelien Goede This study used quantitative research methods in the form of a survey to obtain information regarding access to cell phones and SNS to enable the compilation of SNS groups. In addition, this study also relied on qualitative research methods by using the modal aspect of Dooyeweerd to assist in understanding the use of SNS in peer support and the studying of SAD.

4.2 Data collection and analysis 4.2.1 Determining student IM preferences At the beginning of the semester students completed an interpretive questionnaire. The purpose of the questionnaire was to obtain information regarding their ownership of and access to cell phones, their use of specific SNS as well as their preferences for SNS. The survey was conducted among 81 enrolled second‐year SAD students of which 71 completed the questionnaire; resulting in a response rate of 88%. A depiction of the result on SNS preferences is represented in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Students’ preferred choice of social technology for peer support MXit, WhatsApp and BBM were ranked as the most popular and confirmed that a large group of students already used it in various SNS platforms. Students mentioned other SNS like Facebook, twitter, 2go and gtalk in an open‐ended question, which allowed students to indicate other SNS they use. E‐mail was also listed by a few students. 4.2.2 Forming BBM, MXit and WhatsApp groups As this intervention initiative was optional, the intention was not to include students at all costs. The initiative also had to be manageable from the student assistant’s point of view and only three SNS were selected, namely WhatsApp (23 students), MXit (23 students) and BBM (19 students), representing 65 out of a class of 81 students, which equated to almost 80% of the class. To simplify the work and lighten the workload, it was hoped that messaging from the lecturer could be done using a computer instead of a cell phone, but the university’s firewall would not allow for this. In forming the groups, one group in both BBM and MXit could be formed, but WhatsApp allowed only 15 students per group. Therefore two WhatsApp groups, one with 15 students and the other with 8 students were formed. The groups allowed the lecturer to send messages to all students in a group simultaneously. Communication regarding examination preparation was initiated by the lecturer at the start of the university’s examination period, three weeks before the date scheduled for the SAD examination. An actual gathering was also scheduled two days prior to the examination date to allow students without a cell phone the opportunity to ask questions.

391

Imelda Smit and Roelien Goede 4.2.3 Actual IM interactions In research done by Timmis (2012), four conversation categories were identified, namely:

Construction of meaning and shared understanding through grounding: This represents an exchange of dialogue to establish common ground.

Personal relationships, intimacy and playfulness: Here the discourse is focused on displays of intimacy to support personal relationships.

Division of labour and co‐creation of artefacts: This did not happen often in the Timmis‐research, but represents the co‐creation and transformation of artefacts, including mutual understanding and feedback.

Affective contributions: The sharing of feelings regarding students’ work, their lecturer(s) and peers.

These four categories are used in this research to guide and affirm students in their studies. The students did not use the first week productively for the preparation of their SAD subjects because they were busy with the preparation for their Java programming examination. Instead the time was used to assist students in finding common ground, as can be seen in table 2. Table 2: BBM conversation representing “construction of meaning and shared understanding through grounding” Time Jun 4 Mon 12:29

From Lecturer

Jun 4 Mon 12:40 Jun 5 Tue 02:50 Jun 5 Tue 02:50 Jun 5 Tue 02:55 Jun 5 Tue 02:55 Jun 5 Tue 17:08 Jun 6 Wed 07:04 Jun 6 Wed 07:04 Jun 6 Wed 07:07 Jun 6 Wed 07:07 Jun 6 Wed 07:07

Lecturer Prudence Lecturer Prudence Lecturer Lecturer Prudence Lecturer Prudence Lecturer Zaakir

Message Hi ITRW213 students, over the next 2 weeks I am going to guide you towards the exam. U r welcome 2 ask questions or make contributions E1: Q1 tot 25 + covers ch1,2,3,5. Mostly theory, but also implementation What is the scope That is what u can try 2 establish... I mean the scope for the exam Yes, that is what I mean as well Do u have any anticipated exam q's? Yes I do have them Any specific ones 4 c 1 2 3 + 5? No Disappointing... We do, we currently all focused on the java exam coming up this friday or at least I am

Directly after their Java examination there was a lot of joking and playing to relieve the tension over the examination. This is illustrated in table 3. Table 3: BBM conversation representing “personal relationships, intimacy and playfulness Time Jun 9 Sat 14:50 Jun 9 Sat 14:50 Jun 9 Sat 14:50 Jun 9 Sat 23:41 Jun 9 Sat 23:41

From Lecturer Kga_Dee Quintin Vhasa Lecturer

Jun 9 Sat 23:41 Jun 9 Sat 23:41

Kga_Dee Lecturer

Message So, did u get 99 4 java? Not even close!! Almost Lol not even close, maybe 70 As long as u pass? U will become better, this is not the last u c of java, what's nxt? 213 is next.. Good. We can do much this week. What r your plan ‐ how u wanna go about studying?

Hereafter, the lecturer used questioning and prompting to involve students in using the SNS to assist them in their preparation. There was also an initiative from the lecturer to develop two mind maps, one summarising the SAD material with an indication of important aspects, and the other a summary of the first five theoretical concepts. This was distributed on the SNS, as well as the university Learning Management System (LMS) as students that the mind maps could not be viewed clearly on the SNS. After some prompting from the lecturer, three students on BBM offered to develop the four mind maps. The final mind maps were uploaded on the LMS. The conversation is shown in table 4.

392

Imelda Smit and Roelien Goede Table 4: BBM conversation representing “division of labour and co‐creation of artefacts” Time Jun 12 Tue 14:25 Jun 12 Tue 14:25

From Lecturer Dulce

Jun 12 Tue 14:30

Lecturer

Jun 12 Tue 14:30 Jun 12 Tue 14:30 Jun 12 Tue 14:30 Jun 12 Tue 14:34

Dulce Dulce Dulce Lecturer

Message Anybody had a look @ IMm? Dulce, u don't want to summarise C2 like I did C1, then email to me to upload on eFundi? What is the four business drivers that will influence the development of an information system? I found it Yes, I could try and have it done as soon as possible!:) U r a darling!

After the examination students shared their feelings regarding their performance and their lecturer. This can be seen in table 5. Table 5: BBM conversation representing “affective contributions” Time Jun 18 Mon 12:10 Jun 18 Mon 12:10

From Marco Zaakir

Jun 18 Mon 12:10 Jun 18 Mon 12:10 Jun 19 Tue 02:09 Jun 19 Tue 02:09

Lecturer AziweT Prudence C'ya 4 C'za

Jun 19 Tue 02:09 Jun 19 Tue 02:37 Jun 19 Tue 02:37 Jun 19 Tue 02:37

Marco Prudence Kga_Dee Mr. R

Jun 19 Tue 02:39

Prudence

Message Ooh 6th sense thank you for telling me to review the semester tests Thanks the test I'm sure I passed lol should have paid more attention to semester tests tho Soo, the rest of u? Also sure I passed. but the last two Q's might cost me a rewrite It came we wrote n it left, lol twas a good paper Eish but the 10 principles :'( Also sure dat I passed even thou I'm not sure bwt da last question, eish n the 10 principles I didn't even write them Last question was uml stuff from the previous exam test All the previous exam papers had that last questions Eish enuf bwt d paper now Dear NWU.... Can we please have Mrs. SMIT as 3rd year I.T lecturer for some module! Lololol yes true dat...we xuld just wait for the results

Something worth mentioning is an encouraging development that happened the day before the examination on BBM when students discussed the possibility of questions being asked in the upcoming examination. Questions were clarified and indications were given as to what aspects answers should address. This happened without any prompting or intervention from the lecturer. The same development did not occur on the one MXit and two WhatsApp groups. The example can be seen in table 6. Table 6: BBM conversation representing “potential examination questions Time Jun 16 Sat 04:35 Jun 16 Sat 06:21

From Lufuno Prudence

Jun 16 Sat 14:49 Jun 16 Sat 23:50 Jun 17 Sun 04:56 Jun 17 Sun 04:56 Jun 17 Sun 09:44 Jun 17 Sun 09:44 Jun 17 Sun 09:44 Jun 17 Sun 09:44

Marco Lufuno Prudence Zaakir Prudence Zaakir Zaakir Lecturer

Jun 17 Sun 09:46 Jun 17 Sun 09:46 Jun 17 Sun 09:46 Jun 17 Sun 09:46 Jun 17 Sun 09:49 Jun 17 Sun 09:49

Prudence Lufuno Zaakir Lecturer Prudence Zaakir

Jun 17 Sun 09:49 Jun 17 Sun 09:49

Zaakir Lufuno

Message Can some1 pls help me with Q1 1.2 last year exam paper Fact‐finding, documentation & presentation, feasibility analysis, process & project management....must then state @which FAST phases they are used JRP ... Any possible questions from you guys that can be expected Understand room layout for JRP session How to conduct a JRP session Do u guys feel the cmm and its levels are important? Very important What questions do u think could be asked about it? Name the levels? C6 mindmap is uploaded. Sorry, had a problem with cell phone. But u r doing well without me! Initial, repeatable, defined, manage, optimizing Yes very important, she might ask them What other questions do u think could be asked I like what u r doing. Keep going... To draw it and explain each levels...dats all I think they can ask I don't think we will be asked to explain each level tho, I've never seen a question like that asked in any of the exams or semester tests I take that back just found a question that asked to explain To be on the safe side I think you should understand the levels and be able to

393

Imelda Smit and Roelien Goede Time

From

Jun 17 Sun 09:49 Jun 17 Sun 09:49 Jun 17 Sun 09:49 Jun 17 Sun 10:06

Zaakir Lufuno Zaakir Prudence

Jun 17 Sun 10:06 Jun 17 Sun 10:06 Jun 17 Sun 10:06 Jun 17 Sun 10:06 Jun 17 Sun 10:06 Jun 17 Sun 10:06

Lufuno Zaakir Zaakir Zaakir Zaakir Zaakir

Message explain them Agreed lufuno Do u think its important to know 8 activity in project management? Uhm I think so Those activities are linked to the pm's functions so I think just combine them and immediately just know everything @once Thanks Think of it in terms of the gantt and pert chart Eg negotiate scope‐ it starts and ends on a certain day Idenify tasks‐ a, b , c etc Task duration ‐ tasks. A last 3 days And so on

5. Dooyeweerd as useful framework – why and how? 5.1 How to deal with diversity? When working with individuality structures we always ask the question “what?”, while with aspects the question is “how?”, since this concerns itself with the manner of being – a mode. This is the motivation behind Dooyeweerd referring to this as modal aspects. In this research project, one may ask “What do I experience?”. The answer reflective of the individual structure is “IT students use IM to help them prepare for a Systems Analysis and Design examination”. The answer to “How I experience it?”, involves the modal aspects as discussed in table 1. Therefore, when an individuality structure is analysed theoretically, it is crucial to start with the modal aspects – only then can the investigator understand the entity as a whole. When investigating the nature of philosophical thinking (Kalsbeek, 1975:44‐51), two important elements emerge. First, the religious antithesis manifests itself in various ground motives. Second, philosophical thinking is driven by these ground motives and does not follow a direction of its own accord. We encounter many antitheses in life, black and white, good and bad, and in the context of examination preparation using a cell phone, fun and boring. When using the Timmis (2012) categorisation, four major aspects emerge, namely; formative, social, economic and ethical. As can be seen from the next section, these are not the only modal aspects represented.

5.2 How to deal with unexpected usage? In this study, most of Dooyeweerd’s aspects are represented. It is import to realise though that “many things are of multiple aspects”, for example a cell phone is used mainly for communication (lingual aspect), but it is also used in a particular cultural environment and is embedded in a particular technology (formative aspect). Dooyeweerd called this a retrocipation – when an aspect reaches back to an earlier aspect. Anticipation, according to Dooyeweerd is when an aspect reaches forward to a later aspect, for example a cell phone is a tool to interact socially (social aspect), but that interaction creates interest and fun (aesthetic aspect) for the user. In this way the meaning of an aspect is built in the sense that we have a kernel of meaning created with the retrocipation and anticipation of other aspects. These were depicted in table 1.

6. Conclusion In conclusion it can be said that the intervention was successful. The examples show that students participated well. It is hoped that those students who did not participate, but simply observed also benefitted from what they read. The students who did not form part of the IM groups also benefitted due to the mind‐maps that were compiled and loaded onto the Learning and Collaboration Management System (to which the entire class had access). It is also interesting to note that most of Dooyeweerd’s modal aspects were addressed through the intervention. In terms of the overwhelming amount of work which confused students, the IM intervention allowed students to divide work into manageable chunks and clarify unclear issues as they progressed with their studies.

394

Imelda Smit and Roelien Goede With regard to the future implementation of this technique, the following obstacles should be addressed:

The MXit environment presented a problem in that when the lecturer sent an IM to the whole group, it was received by the group, however as soon as a student sent an IM, it was sent to only the lecturer. This was not conducive to the encouragement of discussions. In future the lecturer should make an effort to send the IM‐answer to the whole group, along with the original question or comment. It should be mentioned that the BBM environment is designed to allow students send IMs to the whole group (as with WhatsApp), with the added feature that certain IMs, containing sensitive topics, can be directed to the lecturer only. This BBM option was used by students on occasion to address sensitive issues.

The WhatsApp environment allowed a maximum number of 15 participants per group. For this reason, two groups were formed. This meant that the full WhatsApp complement could not see all messages. Obviously, the same argument is true for the three environments (BBM, WhatsApp and MXit), and students working in one environment cannot see what is being said in another. It is up to the lecturer to address this issue. However, this problem can only truly be addressed through the use of one environment, but this mean lead to the exclusion of those students without a BlackBerry device. Another option could be to make use of an environment like Facebook. This may exclude students without smartphones, but would allow everybody access through other compatible devices.

References Anderson, T. & Kanuka, H. 1997. On‐line forums: New platforms for professional development and group collaboration. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 3(3). Creswell, J.W. 1998. Qualitative Enquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Denton, A. 2008. Policy priorities to connect Africa, paper presented at M4D 2008, Karlstad, Sweden, 11‐12 Dec. Dooyeweerd, H. 1969. A new critique of theoretical thought. Volume 2. Translated by David H. Freeman and William S. Young. Philadelphia, Pa.: The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company. Dozier, K.S. 2001. Affecting education in the on‐line "classroom": The good, the bad, and the ugly. Journal of Interactive Instruction Development, 13(4), 17‐20. Ellison, N.B., Steinfield, C. & Lampe, C. 2007. The benefits of Facebook “friends:” Social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143–1168. Hamel, J. 2010. ICT4D and the human development and capabilities approach: the potentials of information and communication technology. United Nations Development Programme: Research Paper 2010/37: United Nations. Heeks, R.B. 2010. Do Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) contribute to development? Journal of International Development, 22(5). Heeks, R.B. 2009. Emerging Markets: IT and the World's "Bottom Billion". Communications of the ACM, 52(4). Kalsbeek, L. 1975. Contours of a Christian philosophy: An introduction to Herman Dooyeweerd’s thought. Ed Bernard and Josina Zylstra. Toronto:Canada Kearney, A.T. 2011. African Mobile Observatory: Driving Economic and Social Development through Mobile Services. 1. London: GSMA. Myers, M.D. 2011. "Qualitative Research in Information Systems," MIS Quarterly (21:2), June 1997, pp. 241‐242. MISQ Discovery, archival version, June 1997, http://www.misq.org/supplements/. MISQ Discovery, updated version, last modified: November 12, 2011 www.qual.auckland.ac.nz. Oxford English Dictionary. 2010. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Online version. Date of access: 6 Jul 2012. Rada, R. 1998. Effciency and effectiveness in computer‐supported peer‐peer learning. Computers & Education, 30, 137‐ 146. Teclehaimanot, B. & Hickman, T. 2011. Student‐Teacher Interaction on Facebook: What Students Find Appropriate, Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice To Improve Learning, 55, 3, pp. 19‐30. Timmis, S. 2012. Constant companions: Instant messaging conversations as sustainable supportive study structures amongst undergraduate peers. Computers & Education, 59, 1, pp. 3‐18. Trushell, J., Reymond, C. & Burrell, C. 1998. Undergraduate students' use of information elicited during e‐mail “tutorials”. Computers & Education, 30, 169±182. Tullet, J. 2012. Rise of the smartphone elite. Is this the next digital divide? iWeek, 260 pp24‐27. UNCTAD. 2011. Information Economy Report 2011: ICT's as an Enabler for Private Sector Development, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, October 2011. Wilson, T. & Whitelock, D. 1998. Monitoring the on‐line behaviour of distance learning students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 14, 91±99.

395

Academic Staff’s Challenges in Adopting Blended Learning: Reality at a Developing University Mswazi Tshabalala¹, Charity Ndeya‐Ndereya² and Tiana Van der Merwe2 ¹Centre for Cooperative Education, University of Zululand, KwaDlangezwa, South Africa ²Centre for Teaching and Learning, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa TshabalalaM@unizulu.ac.za NdeyaCN@ufs.ac.za TvdMerwe@ufs.ac.za Abstract: Higher education institutions (HEIs) are striving to provide effective learning experiences to address the needs of a digital generation of learners. Blended learning has emerged as a solution to address these needs and has been adopted by various HEIs. However, not all academic staff members adopt blended learning when it is introduced by their institutions. Although the blended teaching and learning approach offers various advantages to academic staff, negative perceptions held by academic staff may affect its adoption. The purpose of this case study was to investigate the perceptions of and identify challenged facing academic staff that affected the adoption of blended learning in a faculty of education at a developing university in Southern Africa. The study employed the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and the Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT) in a qualitative exploratory research design. The investigation made use of focus group interviews with lecturers in a faculty of education and individual interviews with heads of academic departments, as well as the dean of the faculty. Data gathered pointed to a variety of perceptions hindering academic staff from adopting blended learning. Amongst these were perceptions pertaining to e‐learning or blended learning policy, faculty support by management, computer skills of students and lecturers, as well as inadequate access to computers by students. These seemed to be challenges that the Faculty of Education has to deal with and overcome before academic staff can successfully adopt blended learning. It was not the aim of this study to generalise the findings. In fact, the research was unique in that it applied known knowledge to the new context of a small Southern African university, which is a developing community. It is hoped, however, that lessons learned will make a contribution to the field of higher education and that developing universities will benefit from the research. Keywords: blended learning, adoption, academic staff, perceptions, challenges, higher education

1. Introduction Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) are striving to provide effective, flexible, convenient and accessible learning experiences to address the needs of a new generation of learners entering these institutions (Thomas, 2008). Students entering HEIs have a keen interest in using technology and demand to use technology in teaching and learning, in and out of the classroom (De George‐Walker & Keeffe, 2010). These students display technology‐influenced aptitude, attitudes, beliefs and sensitivities (Oblinger, 2003). In order to cope with these technologically astute students, academic staff members are challenged to utilise innovation in their delivery approaches. One of the important approaches to teaching and learning that many institutions have adopted is blended learning (De George‐Walker & Keeffe, 2010; Dziuban, Moskal & Hartman, 2005). The blended learning approach offers advantages to academic staff. These include accessibility of information, universal connectivity to form communities of inquiry and innovative teaching strategies. However, negative perceptions held by members of academic staff could affect the adoption of blended learning (Davis, 1993; Thomas, 2008; Oh & Park, 2009; Fresen, 2010). Such perceptions include aspects pertaining to innovation and change, time, workload, lack of institutional support, technology infrastructure, the importance of academic freedom, instructional delivery methods and quality assurance. Based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis, 1993), the researchers explored the perceptions of the academic staff towards in the adoption of blended learning in the Faculty of Education at a developing iniversity.

2. Aim of the study and the research question The aim of the research study was to explore the perceptions of and identify challenges facing academic staff that affected the adoption of blended learning in the Faculty of Education at a developing university in Southern Africa. The study addressed the following research question: What academic staff perceptions affect the adoption of blended learning in the faculty of education of a developing university?

396

Mswazi Tshabalala, Charity Ndeya‐Ndereya and Tiana Van der Merwe

3. Literature review The concept blended learning, was derived from two words, blend and learning. The word blend means combining things and learning denotes an assimilation of new knowledge as explained by Olivier (2011). Blended learning allows students to engage in learning outside the confines of the classroom; with synchronous tools, such, as web‐conferencing, Skype, group chats and the asynchronous tools, such as, discussion boards, blogs and social networking sites (Singh, 2003). There is no single commonly accepted definition of blended learning, but practitioners “negotiate their own meaning” according to the needs of their contexts of practice (Heinze, 2008, p.8). The absence of a universal definition for blended learning allows HEIs to contextualise the concept according to their respective environments. Hence, this study, adopted the definition of blended learning used by the university involved in the case study, which states, “the mixture of traditional delivery including: lectures, group discussions, apprenticeships and experiential learning, together with e‐learning methods, which accommodate various learning needs of a diverse audience in a variety of subjects”. There are, however, opposing views and challenges regarding the concept of blended learning. For instance, Oliver and Trigwell (2005) caution against the use of the term blended learning primarily because it lacks the perspective of the learner, and consider blending from a lecturer’s point of view. Despite the various and sometimes contradictory definitions of blended learning and the different challenges in implementing blended learning, HEIs are striving to adopt blended learning because of the potential it has to transform higher education and engage students in meaningful learning experiences (Garrison & Kanuka, 2004). The advent of technological innovation and changing academic process in HEIs has necessitated the formulation of policies, strategies and improvements in infrastructure. Despite all the supporting enterprises instituted by HEIs, technology affects how an academic staff member thinks, feels and works. Oh and Park (2009), Alebaikan (2010) and Fresen (2010) concur that various perceptions held by academic staff can have an impact on the adoption and success of blended learning within institutions. From the literature reviewed, it was concluded that some of the perceptions that influence the adoption of blended learning by academic staff are adequate or inadequate computer skills, time to prepare appropriate teaching and learning materials, students’ restricted access to technological resources and a lack of innovative teaching strategies to address the digital generation of students (Benson, Anderson & Ooms, 2011; Brown, 2002; Gutteridge 2009; Ocak, 2010; Prinsloo & Van Rooyen, 2007; Thomas, 2008). Fresen (2010) points out that most academic staff members use technology for inter alia, research, academic writing and e‐mails, but few use it for their teaching. She further concludes that successful technology adoption, therefore, depends on the perception of an individual academic staff member. For a better understanding of such perceptions, the (TAM) was employed to explore the perceptions of academic staff that affect the adoption of blended learning in the Faculty of Education at a developing university. Additionally, the Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT) (Rogers, 1983) was employed to categorise the academic staff according to their rate of blended learning adoption.

3.1 Technology acceptance model (TAM) The TAM was developed by Davis (1993) to explain the acceptance of a technology. Although blended learning is not a technology per se, technology forms an integral part of this teaching and learning approach. This study utilised the TAM for its investigation because it was deemed an appropriate tool to enable the researchers to learn about the factors that influence individuals to adopt or not to adopt technology (Almobarraz, 2007). The relationships in TAM are illustrated in Figure 1. According to Davis (1993), the perception of an individual regarding the acceptance and adoption of technology, can be divided into two distinct categories, namely, (i) the perceived ease of use (PEOU), and (ii) the perceived usefulness (PU) of the technology. Although these two categories can influence the attitude of an individual towards using technology separately, they are also interrelated and the PEOU of technology can directly affect the PU. The PEOU and the PU of technology are also influenced indirectly by external factors (Davis, 1993) and they in turn influence the attitude towards using technology; thereby leading to the actual use of technology or the decision not to use technology. External factors include system features, situational constraints, user characteristics and human interventions (Vishwanath & Goldhaber, 2003).

397

Mswazi Tshabalala, Charity Ndeya‐Ndereya and Tiana Van der Merwe Perceived Usefulness External Factors

Attitude towards Using

Actual System Use

Perceived Ease of Use External Stimulus

Affective Response

Cognitive Response

Behavioural Response

Source: (Adapted from Davis (1993) p. 476) Figure 1: Technology acceptance model

3.2 Innovation diffusion theory (IDT) Another theory that was used in this study to contribute to the understanding of the adoption of technology innovation by academic staff in their teaching, along with the TAM, is the IDT (Rogers, Singhal & Quinlan, 1999). The researchers chose the IDT as a useful instrument to explore the rate at which academic staff in the Faculty of Education adopted blended learning (Thomas, 2008). It has been established that these two theories complement each other in explaining the acceptance or rejection of technology (Almobarraz, 2007). Rogers (1983) proposes that individuals are categorised according to the rate at which they adopt innovation as shown in Table 1. Table 1: Innovation adoption categories Category Innovators (2.5%) Early Adopters (13.5%) Early majority (34%)

Description Risk takers who take the initiative to try something new; Respected group leaders who encourage adoption by the whole group; Careful and unwilling to take risks;

Late Majority (34%) Laggards (16%)

Always suspicious of, or resistant to change and are difficult to influence; Adamant in resisting change.

Source: Adapted from Rogers (1983) p. 246) During adoption, an individual is required to undergo an Innovation‐Decision Process (IDP) which entails sequential steps of knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, and confirmation (Sahin, 2006 p.18) as shown in Figure 2 below. KNOWLEDGE

PERSUASION

DECISION

IMPLEMENTATION

CONFIRMATION

Figure 2: Adaptation of five stages in Innovation Decision Process The preceding section provides information regarding the adoption of technology or innovation by means of the TAM and the IDT. In this research study the two theories were applied to blended learning ‐ an innovation in a teaching and learning context. Thus, the two theories informed the research design and the methodology used for the research in order to collect the appropriate data.

4. Research design and methodology In addressing the research question, a qualitative exploratory case study research design (McMillan & Schumacher, 2010) was employed. The use of this design was grounded within the interpretivist epistemology in an effort to understand the perceptions of the academic staff regarding the adoption of blended learning, through the meanings and importance that these academics assigned to it (Maree, 2010). The study employed a purposive and complete sample wherein the entire population of 41 academic staff members in the Faculty of Education were invited to participate in the study (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2010). The target population included the 32 full‐time lecturers in the Faculty of Education, the heads of all the eight Faculty departments and the dean of the Faculty. Only 16 lecturers accepted the invitation. The lecturers

398

Mswazi Tshabalala, Charity Ndeya‐Ndereya and Tiana Van der Merwe were invited to participate in focus group interviews while the heads of departments and the dean were invited to participate in individual interviews. Data were collected separately from each of the three professional levels of the Faculty, in order to give freedom of expression to lower‐level members. A one‐to‐one informal conversation interview (McMillan & Schumacher, 2006) strategy was employed with the dean of the Faculty. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with each head of department (HOD) while lecturers participated in semi‐structured focus group interviews. Lecturers also responded to a questionnaire that was designed to elicit information on selected characteristics of the lecturers who participated in the study.

5. Findings The questionnaire provided the study with pertinent data regarding selected characteristics of the participants. There were 16 academic staff members who completed the biographical data questionnaire and participated in focus group interviews. Table 2 displays the summary of the lecturers’ characteristics. Table 2: Lecturer participant profile (n=16) Gender

Age

Computer skills

Position

Experience in years

Female

<30

Adequate

Senior Lecturer

Male

31‐40

Lecturer

41‐50

Junior Lecturer

3‐6 7‐10

Less than adequate Use of MOODLE 3‐5 years

51‐60

Use of MOODLE >2 years

>10

Never used MOODLE

Six of the interviewees were female and 10 were male. The majority (12) of the participants were lecturers. Three were junior lecturers and only one was a senior lecturer. Most (12) of the participants were mature and aged between 31 and 50 years of age. Of the participants 11 reported to have taught at university level for a period of three to six years. There were two participants who had taught for seven to ten years and two who had taught for more than 10 years. In their self‐rating of computer literacy skills, 14 academic staff members indicated that they had adequate computer literacy skills that were adequate to the requirements for adopting blended learning. Two junior lecturers who had taught at university for less than two years indicated that they had less than adequate computer skills. In the group, only two lecturers reported to have used MOODLE or another learning management system (LMS) for a period of three to five years and another two admitted having used an LMS but for less than two years. The remaining 12 had never used an LMS. In addition, only two lecturers reported to teach modules that were currently using MOODLE. These two lecturers reported that they had posted learning and assessment activities, as well as discussion forums, on MOODLE of their own volition, hence they may be categorised as innovators according to Table 1 (Rogers, 1983). It is important to note that among the HODs, during the interviews only one reported to be teaching a course through MOODLE. To complement the TAM, the IDT was employed to categorise the academic staff in the faculty according to the rate of adoption of blended learning. The study indicated that there is a blended learning adoption gap between the three participants who indicated that they were using blended learning in their courses and the remaining 21 academic staff participants. Atypical of the IDT (Rogers, 1983), there was no evidence of the adoption of blended learning over a period of 11 years in the Faculty. Thus, blended learning had not proceeded beyond the knowledge step in the IDP (Sahin, 2006). Therefore, it can be deduced that according to the IDT there were only three innovators and no other categories had emerged. Despite the continued use of computers in research and in communication, participants seemed to be slow adopters of blended learning, a behaviour that had also been observed by Fresen (2010) with regards to the acceptance of computer technology for learning.

399

Mswazi Tshabalala, Charity Ndeya‐Ndereya and Tiana Van der Merwe The discussion that follows is informed by the themes and interview responses relating to the TAM, as summarised in Table 3. The table provides the summaries of interview discussions as responses according to the predetermined themes and questions based on the TAM. These responses have been organised to form sub‐themes. Table 3: Themes, related interview questions and responses Theme Understanding Of Blended Learning (UOBL) External Factors (EF)

Interview question

Response/Sub‐theme

What is your understanding of blended learning?

Do you think your level of technology knowledge is sufficient for teaching a blended course? Why or why not? (Lecturers) How has the introduction and implementation of blended learning in the Faculty of Education influenced your decision to engage or not to engage in blended learning? Do you think that the Faculty of Education has an enabling structure for the implementation of blended learning? Why or why not? What do you perceive to be the benefits of using blended learning in higher education?

Perceived Usefulness (PU)

Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU)

What is your perceived level of difficulty of using blended learning?

Attitude Towards Using Blended Learning (ATUBL)

Are you currently using blended learning as a teaching mode? Why or why not?

8a.

What are your views on the barriers that impede lecturers from engaging in blended learning?

8b.

What are your recommendations for the introduction or improvement of the implementation of blended learning in the Faculty of Education? (HODs and Dean)

Never heard of blended learning Mixed teaching methods Use of computers in teaching and learning Inadequate technology knowledge, need training Yes, I hold an ICDL (International Computing Driving Licence) Not influenced Not realised any implementation Discouraged by inadequate technological resources No blended learning structure in place No guiding policy

Time saving and benefiting large classes ‐ reaching a large group in a short time Easy access to electronic resources Flexibility – accessibility of learning resources at all times Promoting student independence Creating opportunities for networking Uncertain Difficult without support Not doable Not using blended learning due to a lack of knowledge No, students have very limited access to computers Yes, out of personal interest Lack of a policy on blended learning Large class size Computer illiteracy of students and lecturers Inadequate technological resources Lack of institutional support Incorporate blended learning into the curriculum Provide e‐learning infrastructure in the Faculty Develop e‐learning skills of staff and students Monitor and evaluate the implementation of blended learning

This table bears evidence that the academic staff had many perceptions regarding the adoption of blended learning in their faculty. The perceptions ranged from a few positive ones to a majority of negatives perceptions. Thus, it can be deduced that the academic staff faced challenges in adopting blended learning. Further discussion of the study is found in the section that follows.

400

Mswazi Tshabalala, Charity Ndeya‐Ndereya and Tiana Van der Merwe

6. Discussion The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore and clarify the perceptions of academic staff towards adoption of blended learning in their specific context of the Faculty of Education at a developing university. In addressing the research question, five themes and their respective sub‐themes were identified with regard to various perceptions that academics had towards the adoption of blended learning. The majority of lecturers and HODs displayed little or no understanding of the concept of blended learning to the extent that the interviewing researcher had to describe blended learning to the interviewees in order to continue with the interviews with everyone having a common understanding of the concept. Some lecturers and HODs regarded blended learning as referring to, among other things, teaching using Information Communication Technologies (ICTs), teaching using mixed methods, meaning a variety of teaching methods and teaching using a computer in a lesson. It is, however, essential that academic staff display a contextually correct understanding of the concept of blended learning in order to perform related duties accordingly. Even though most of the participants reported that they used computers for some activities, such as research and in‐class face‐to‐face presentations, they perceived that they could not adopt blended learning because of the lack of an enabling environment. External factors mentioned as contributing to the environment included a lack of policy on blended learning; a lack of training for staff; and limited access to the computer laboratory for students. These factors were perceived as constraining the implementation of blended learning. In this study it became apparent that the external factors indirectly influenced the participant’s decisions not to use blended learning. Even the staff members, who indicated that they were comfortably using the computer, did not have the confidence to engage in blended learning due to a lack of adequate knowledge of blended learning; hence they recommended staff training. The challenges around blended learning implementation clearly centred around the absence of a policy on blended learning. The absence of a unit to drive the implementation also posed a serious challenge, hence the uncoordinated implementation of blended learning by a few lecturers. In addition, other factors mentioned as contributing to non‐adoption of blended learning included inadequate computer equipment, large classes and lack of staff training to integrate online learning and face‐to‐face learning. It was also mentioned that the Faculty of Education did not have proper means of disseminating information, thus some academic staff members were unaware that blended learning was being practised by their colleagues. All this information confirmed that the Faculty of Education lacked an enabling structure for the implementation of blended learning in terms of infrastructure, policy and support. With regards to perceived usefulness, all the participants indicated that they realised the potential benefits of blended learning, ranging from flexibility to accessibility of learning. However, the perception that blended learning required effort raised fear of failure in some participants while others literally admitted that they suffered from technophobia. The fear that blended learning might introduce digitalisation in the faculty aroused fears of becoming redundant. Lack of confidence seemed to dampen the spirits of the lecturers who perceived themselves as having the basic computer skills and they did not think they had the necessary expertise to use blended learning. They conceded that they would need extensive staff development in order to implement blended learning. Serious challenges that hindered the adoption of blended learning were perceived to include the following aspects:

Lack of policy

Lack of faculty support

Lack of technological and computer skills

Large class size

Inadequate technological resources.

Consequently, academic staff was unanimous in advocating for the establishment of a policy on blended learning, upgrading of computer laboratories for students and the establishment of a unit to coordinate blended learning and all related activities. Most of the participants were keen to develop skills related to the implementation of blended learning through staff development workshops. One recommendation articulated

401

Mswazi Tshabalala, Charity Ndeya‐Ndereya and Tiana Van der Merwe by most participants was that all academic staff members should undergo training in the use of MOODLE. They expressed a deep desire for the faculty to set processes in motion for the implementation of blended learning. The challenges that emerged are clear reasons why many academic staff members do not incorporate blended learning in their teaching and learning activities. These challenges as revealed by the TAM correspond well with the IDT finding that only 12.5% of the participants were innovators and no other categories were in existence, as blended learning was not implemented in earnest by the Faculty of Education in question.

7. Conclusion The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of and identify challenges facing academic staff regarding the adoption of blended learning in the Faculty of Education at a developing university in Southern Africa. The literature provided information on blended learning, such as the various definitions, universal adoption practices and relevant adoption theories. Relevant adoption theories informed the research methodology employed in this study. Through the research design, the academic staff who were interviewed revealed their attitudes, feelings and perceptions. It was concluded that academic staff faced challenges that inhibited the adoption of blended learning in their faculty. The major challenges were identified as the lack of an enabling environment, lack of policy on blended learning, academic staff’s lack of expertise to use blended learning, and limited access for students to the computer laboratory. The main lesson learned from the research is that despite the good intentions of the university to introduce blended learning, the challenges discussed above resulted from a failure to plan properly for the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of progress. Furthermore, it seems that the LMS (MOODLE) the university uses is underutilised and students are not benefiting much from its existence, probably due to the uncoordinated efforts to implement blended learning in the faculty of education. Although this study might have covered known knowledge at some levels of research in higher education, it is unique in the sense that it applied known knowledge in a new context, that of a Southern African developing university in a developing community. Therefore, it is hoped that the research findings will make a contribution to the adoption of blended learning in newly established universities. The study has equipped the researchers with valuable knowledge regarding the adoption of blended learning in this developing university. However, the preceding findings and discussions indicate a need for further research on the formulation of guidelines for implement blended learning at the faculty of education.

References Alebaikan, R.A. (2010) Perceptions of Blended Learning in Saudi Universities, (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis) University of Exeter, South West England. Almobarraz, A. (2007) Perceived attributes of diffusion of innovation theory as predictors of internet adoption among the faculty members of Imam Mohammed Bin Saud University, (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis) University of North Texas, Denton. Benson, V., Anderson, D. and Ooms, A. (2011) “Educators’ perceptions, attitudes and practices: Blended learning in business and management education”, Research in Learning Technology, Vol. 19. No. 2, pp 143–154. Brown, I.T.J. (2002) “Individual and technological factors affecting perceived use of Web based learning technologies in a developing country”, The Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries, Vol. 9, No.5, pp1‐15. Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2010) Research Methods in Education, Routledge, USA & Canada. Davis, F.D. (1993) “User acceptance of Information technology: System characteristics user perceptions and behavioural impacts”, International Journal of Man‐Machine Studies, Vol 38, No. 3, pp 475‐487. De George‐Walker, L. and Keeffe, M. (2010) “Self‐determined blended learning: A case study of blended learning design”, Higher Education Research & Development, Vol 29, No.1, pp 1‐13. Dziuban, C., Moskal, P. and Hartman, J. (2005) Higher Education, blended learning and the generations: knowledge is power‐no more. In Bourne, Moore (Eds.). Elements of Quality Online Education: Engaging Communities, Needham. Sloan Centre for Online Education. Garrison, R.D. and Kanuka, H. (2004) “Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education”, The Internet and Higher Education, Vol 7, No. 2004, pp 95‐105. Gutteridge, R.G. (2009) The impact of socio‐cultural factors on blended learning in the development of academic literacy in a tertiary vocational context, (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis) Durban University of Technology, Durban. Fresen, J.W. (2010) “Factors influencing lecturer uptake of e‐learning. Special Edition on LAMS and Learning Design”, Teaching English with Technology, Vol 10, No. 3, pp 81‐97.

402

Mswazi Tshabalala, Charity Ndeya‐Ndereya and Tiana Van der Merwe Heinze, A. (2008) Blended Learning: An Interpretive Action Research Study (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis) University of Salford, Salford. Kim, T.G., Lee .H. and Law, R. (2008) “An empirical examination of the acceptance behaviour of hotel front office systems: An extended technology acceptance model”, Tourism Management, Vol 29, (2008) pp 500–513. Maree, K. (2010) First steps in research, Van Schaik, Pretoria. McMillan, J.H. and Schumacher, S. (2010) Research in Education. Evidence Based Inquiry, Pearson, New Jersey. Oblinger, D. (2003) “Boomers, Gen‐X and Mellenials. Understanding the new student”,. Educause, Vol 1, No. 1, pp 38‐47. Ocak, M. A. (2010) “Blend or not to blend: a study investigating faculty members’ perceptions of blended teaching”, World Journal on Educational Technology, Vol 2, No. 3, pp 196‐210. Oh, E. and Park, S. (2009) “How are universities involved in blended instruction? Educational Technology & Society, Vol12, No. 3, pp 327‐342. Oliver, M. and Trigwell, K. (2005) Can “Blended Learning’ Be Redeemed?” E–Learning, Vol 2, No1, pp 17‐26. Olivier, J. (2011) Accommodating and promoting multilingualism through blended learning ( Upublished Ph.D. thesis ) North West University, Vanderbijlpark. Prinsloo, P. and Van Rooyen, A.A. (2007) “Exploring a blended learning approach to improving student success in the teaching of second year accounting”, Meditari Accountancy Research, Vol 15, No. 1, pp 51‐69. Rogers, E.M. (1983) Diffusion of innovations, The Free Press, New York. Rogers, E.M., Singhal, A. and Quinlan, M. M. (1999) Diffusion of Innovations. An integrated approach to communication theory and research, Routledge, New York. Sahin, I. (2006) “Detailed review of Roger’s Diffusion of Innovations Theory and educational technology ‐ related studies based on Rogers’ theory”, The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, Vol 5, No. 3, pp 14‐23. Singh, H. (2003) “Building Effective Blended Learning Programs”, Educational Technology, Vol 43, No. 6, pp 51‐62. Thomas, P.Y. (2008) “Managing the change towards a blended learning model at the University of Botswana”, NAWA. Journal of Language and Communications, Vol 2, No.1, pp 106‐125. Vishwanath, A. and Goldhaber, G. M. (2003) “An examination of the factors contributing to adoption decisions among late‐ diffused technology products”, New media & society, Vol 5, No. 4, pp 547‐572.

403

Globalisation and e‐Learning: Integrating University and Professional Qualifications for Employability and Lifelong Learning James Uhomoibhi1 and Margaret Ross2 1 University of Ulster, Co Antrim, Northern Ireland, UK 2 Southampton Solent University, Southampton, UK j.uhomoibhi@ulster.ac.uk margaret.ross@solent.ac.uk Abstract: The rapid advances in technology and improved and relatively easy access to the internet has meant that increasing number of individuals everywhere crave for access to information and education to enhance their knowledge and skills for better jobs and higher wages. The paper discusses the preparation for employment of undergraduates by the integration of external vocational qualifications into academic courses, and using these in preparation for life‐long learning. Many of the assessments discussed are via on‐line learning, making these independent of global location for those that use computers in a work environment or at home, possibly via mobile technology. For degree courses, ICDL (International Computer Driving Licence) could be taken by all first year undergraduates. For network related degree vocational qualifications, such as the Ethical Hacker, the whole course can be purchased; this is similarly the case for Cisco qualifications. Undergraduate degree and Masters Students can take a range of vocational qualifications that can be assessed on‐line, such as those for Microsoft and ISEB qualifications. In certain disciplines, such as for accounting, this approach of designing courses that relate to professional qualifications is a usual practice. The current benefits are examined and discussed including increased employability, as additional professional qualifications, globally recognised, can be achieved in addition to academic qualifications. The future benefits are also considered, such as raising awareness of external qualifications of examination bodies for post academic assessment of skills, to coincide with current employment; the availability "worldwide", and online learning which is suitable for self‐study, using mainly free material online, in preparation for online assessments, which are particularly useful during career breaks (such as on maternity leave, illness, gaps between jobs following redundancy etc). The authors conclude that in this era of globalisation e‐ learning has facilitated and continues to play an important role in the process of integration of university and professional qualifications useful for employability and sustainable lifelong learning in diverse fields of specialisation. Keywords: employability, life long learning, professional qualifications

1. Introduction Universities today have additional responsibilities, not just to educate students to obtain a qualification, but to prepare them for employability often in the global market as well as to prepare them for an ever‐changing world (Uhomoibhi , Ross 2012), (Uhomoibhi, Ross 2010). The latter requires the students of today to become sufficiently self‐motivated, to enable them to accept the need for continuous up‐skilling. This is particularly important for those involved directly or indirectly in computing. Although there is always the pressure of time on the content of undergraduate and postgraduate courses, it can be addressed within a couple of student contact hours (Valtanen et al 2011), (Handelzalts 2009). This can be reinforced by firstly encouraging computing students to compare the technology of today and its uses, with that of twenty and thirty years ago. This immediately illustrates the amount of change that the undergraduate could experience during their working career. This leads naturally to discussions of how the students can keep their knowledge up to date. These discussions include the benefits and disadvantages of self‐study, and involvement with professional computer societies, rather than relying on employers (who might only be interested in just‐in‐time training).

2. Future trends Students can be asked to consider future changes over a five and ten year period in different areas. This can be included within assessments for some units. Examples of this are from a final year undergraduate degree unit of one of the authors. The students were given a choice of two different topics from a list including

Social Responsibility including ISO 26000

Six Sigma

Green IT issues and the EU Code of Conduct for Data Centres

ITIL and ISO 20000 service management approaches

404

James Uhomoibhi and Margaret Ross

Prototype approach including DSDM

Information Security Management standards ISO 27001

For each topic, the student has to describe and discuss the topic, identify the advantages and disadvantages of it, its relevance to social responsibility (such as the risks to people if not correctly implemented or the benefits to the clients or businesses) and the prediction of changes relevant to the topic in a period of five years ahead. This approach of future predictions has been used for a number of years. This is appreciated by the students, particularly when they become aware of the time that is required for organisations to make changes in order to conform to new regulations such as the WEEE (Waste and Electrical and Electronic Equipment) legislation, which is recorded as taking several years for some organisations. Examples of actual legally enforced or business driven changes, and the effort and costs they entail, are discussed, so early predictions are seen to be of direct benefit to an employer. The students find that they cannot just find possible changes from the Internet, so they have to "interpolate" ahead from current trends. Examples of changes could be the introduction of a ISO standards, say for DSDM or Six Sigma, and independent audits undertaken by Certification Bodies against this standard. This could require all middle and large size organisations, in addition to being required to have an annual financial audit, to have an annual independent security audit to a specified ISO standard in order to continue trading. The students have become very interested in the predictions, including the likelihood and cost to implement these. The students present their ideas to the other students. The relevance of future predictions to their employability is then discussed. This has been commented upon by past students during job interviews. This discussion leads naturally back to the need for lifelong learning, including making use of the facilities of professional bodies.

3. Professional bodies In both authors' universities, the students are encouraged to join a professional society, such as the BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT, or the IET (for the students involved more with hardware aspects of computing) (Lumpe 2007,). On some on‐line applications for jobs, there is often a question asking if the applicant belongs to a relevant professional society, allowing only a Yes or No response. This implies that the student is interested in the subject, not just in obtaining a qualification. The students that belong to such a society can then access technical reports, and join Specialist Groups, many of which have over twenty per cent of their membership outside the UK. Activities are organised by the Specialist Groups, which are equally accessible to all regardless of location. They could possibly become involved with professional bodies, where they could be active remotely (Almpanis et al 2011). An example of this is the BCS, where members of the various most senior committees are in different parts of the world, and attend the meetings via technology. Another example is the international BCS e‐learning Specialist Group, which has over 27 per cent of its members outside the UK. These can submit papers to the e‐ learning Specialist Group’s annual conference, INSPIRE (International Software Process Improvement through Research and Education) and if accepted, to be able to present these remotely by Internet technology. In addition members can enter the e‐learning Specialist Group’s competitions regardless of their location via the Internet. The winner this year for the Open class came from Mauritius, and the previous year, was from Australia, with the runner‐up in the Student class from Malta. This competitor asked if her award certificate could be scanned and sent, in addition to the posted copy, to her immediately as she wished to show it the following day at a job interview. This was successful, and she reported that the new employer was very impressed with her achievements with this international competition. Activities such as these can be important in keeping the CV current. BCS meetings are often recorded, and put on the BCS website. Webinar events are undertaken. These activities allow participation by students and their lecturers, regardless of location. In addition to these, there are BCS conferences held inside and outside the UK, such as the e‐learning 2012 conference held in Finland, and a BCS conference in 2013 in the UAE. The major BCS Committees, including the BCS Council, include members, which attend via technology, from outside the UK, including Canada and the Far East. Being actively involved in committee roles, particularly in those related to the employer's activities can be very beneficial for job interviews and for internal promotion. The responsibility of those roles demonstrates management

405

James Uhomoibhi and Margaret Ross potential and the reliability of the applicant in the eyes of peers. This applies to roles on international committees where, in addition, this demonstrates the ability to work successfully with those from different countries and cultures. This leads to discussions with the students about the global aspect of e‐learning and the computing industry today, which must be viewed as a global environment.

4. Education and qualifications The geographic restrictions on attending a university have now been removed. Although actual attendance is very desirable, students can study remotely for degrees such as with the UK Open University, with attendance only for a couple of weeks a year, or for professional examinations which require no physical attendance and can be taken locally. Examples of these are the BCS Professional examinations which have Certificate, Diploma and Professional Graduate Diploma levels. that are approximately comparable to first, second and final year undergraduate level. For many years one of the authors has run distance learning as well as attending courses for these qualifications, with students from all continents, excluding Antarctica (Ross 2003). The assessment is via centrally set and marked examinations, so the remote students were able to travel to the nearest centre, rather than to the UK, to take these examinations. Many assessments for qualifications can now be undertaken via the Internet at centres or local universities, so further reducing the need for physical travel by students. An example of this is the ICDL (International Computer Driving Licence) and its equivalent ECDL (European Computer Driving Licence). The university of one of the authors was the first UK centre for ECDL , and the university made this available to the staff and students as an additional qualification. The level is of competence in end‐user level computing, including e‐ mail, searching the Internet, using word‐processing, spread sheets, databases and PowerPoint, which could be taken by first year undergraduates, possibly as an alternative or part of a first‐year assessment. The ICDL and ECDL are examined via on‐line assessment. Many organisations in the UK require that staff, that are end‐users of computers, to undertake the ECDL qualifications. By encouraging students to take the same qualification, this provides their potential employers with an exact estimation of their end‐user skills. This in turn is an advantage for the student when applying for a job. By the inclusion of professional examinations, in degree courses, especially those that can be studied and assessed by e‐learning, the employability, in the global computing industry can be enhanced. The professional qualifications can be easily combined with particular units, as part of the assessment for that unit or as an additional qualification for which the course unit is aligned. The cost of taking the optional additional qualification can be met by the student. The latter structure was implemented by one of the authors, whose second year degree students, on successfully completing an Analysis and Design unit with both in‐course and examination assessment, were, if successful, given the option to take the ISEB Structured Systems Analysis and Design professional examination. This was particularly popular with the part‐time students and the better full‐time students. All reported afterwards by past students that this was of direct benefit to their CVs and future employability. Currently, students at this university, on the appropriate computing courses, can take some of the Cisco qualifications, and also that of the Ethical Hacker. The material to support the latter professional qualification is purchased by the university, and is dependent on the number of students taking this course. This reduces the financial risk to the university. With the global industries, almost all of which are dependent on computers, it is essential that students develop an international perspective and their qualifications are widely recognised. This becomes even more difficult, as the names of degree courses and even the titles of the units on these courses do not always give a clear understanding to potential employers about the level of competence of the students in the particular discipline. An example of this is in the games development courses, which could be based on the idea and design of a computer game, or, the technical development of such a game. By including globally recognised qualifications within the design of undergraduate and postgraduate degree courses, the potential employer could easily become aware of the technical skills of the student. In addition, by advertising the option of taking these professional qualifications, aligned with the university courses, this information could be of particular interest to organisations investigating potential full‐time or part‐time courses for their employees or in taking students for a placement year in their organisation.

406

James Uhomoibhi and Margaret Ross To increase the recognition of courses by potential employers, the university can apply for accreditation of that course, such as by the BCS. Although this involves a fee, it provides an external recognition of the course and the university, by an independent external international organisation. This can be beneficial to a student when applying for employment as it increases the credibility of their course.

5. Employability models To help to prepare for a future career or a change of career in the computing area, there are many qualifications that can be prepared for remotely, by courses or by self‐study, such as those offered by the BCS for topics such as analysis, design, testing and legal issues such as data protection. In addition, many can access for free, the SFIAplus model. This identifies different roles in the computing industry, from the technical ones such as programming, testing, web design, security experts to managerial and educational ones and others such as technical authors. There are also levels within each role, from those who have just left school, or university, or those with different levels of experience in the appropriate computing industry. For each role, at the particular level, the model explains the tasks that are likely to be undertaken at work, also the expected typical qualifications and the skills normally required, both technical and soft skills, such as the ability to communicate effectively by word and in writing. As the level increases towards senior management for that role, the person would often be expected to be able to present to an audience, to be aware of developments in their technical field and have a wider understanding of business issues in their field, outside their own organisation. The students, particularly the part‐time and mature students, found that the SFIAplus model was particularly useful to help them prepare for their next annual appraisal. They used it to justify particular skills or qualifications that they wished their employer's to consider for them (Udall and Ross 2012). They also found it helpful, in considering their long term career planning; over at say fifteen to twenty years, where a change of direction might be necessary to reach the levels of top management.

6. Internet assistance for employability The geographic location is no longer a restriction, due to the availability of free and open source software in order to provide communication and video conferencing facilities via the Internet. Many of these facilities can be used at no cost. Further action can be taken to assist employability, using the Internet, whether for students, those looking for new jobs or just wishing to keep aware of employment options. One activity is to prepare a good CV. There are many examples and explanations of how to do this freely available via the Internet, particularly provided by universities. Typically it should include full contact details, qualifications, details of education (eg the name of the school with date started and left etc), relevant computing work experience, and probably separately other work experience, together with further information. This last section is particularly useful as it can give employers additional information about a candidate. For instance, a history of voluntary work implies possibly reliability, ability to work as a member of a team and a caring attitude. If a candidate had been successful at a sport such as running, this would indicate self‐motivation, dedication and reliability, especially if the candidate had represented a school or club, and if it was a team sport, such as football, it would imply that the candidate was a team player. This could be very important in the computing industry. If the candidate had been the team Captain in a sport or been Chairperson, Secretary or Treasurer of say a college club, this would imply that the candidate was respected by his or her peers and had possible management potential. The students are then asked to reduce the length of their CV to two sides of A4, still with a good choice of font for easy readability and a good use of white space. The students are recommended that once they have left college or university, it is necessary to always think about maintaining and updating an "active" CV, by adding to it every few years or ideally each year. A further activity, involving the Internet, that the authors has encouraged their students to undertake to increase their employability, concerns job advertisements. The students are asked to search to the Internet for advertisements for a job at an appropriate level in their chosen computing field (Ross et al 2009). Then they are asked to investigate, again via the Internet, the potential organisation, particularly in the area relevant to the advertised job. The students would then be asked to look again at their CV, and see if it should be re arranged to make it more relevant for that particular job. These students are then asked to prepare a one‐

407

James Uhomoibhi and Margaret Ross page letter of application, which would accompany the CV, if they work really to apply for that post. This letter should be designed especially for that particular job. The students can look at many suitable examples via the Internet. Finally, the students are separated into small groups of say two or three, and asked to identify questions for an interview, then to hold mock interviews with each member of another group. The lecturer moved from group to comment on the questions and the replies, in addition to asking further questions to the interviewees. This activity is felt to remove some of the fear related to applying for a job.

7. Conclusions The availability of free guidance via the Internet for all these aspects relating to employability could be of benefit to those, either at school, college or those undertaking self‐study. The access to e‐learning material, to qualifications and also free technical knowledge has now opened up, providing they have Internet access, much wider opportunities for all, regardless of geographic location. This has paved way for increased productivity in industries with better informed workforce. There has also been the growing interest in employees to engage in lifelong learning as part of their continuing personal and professional development. The issue of integration remain core to all of these in the sense that professional and business input to education has the potential to make for well educated employees able to meet the needs of business. E‐ Leaning and associated technologies whilst opening up new opportunities for learners has the potential to address some challenges faced by higher education institutions and professional bodies attempting to meet the needs of business. Integration of processes, collaboration and joint efforts utilising e‐learning seems to be producing right results.

References Almpanis T, Miller E, Ross E, Price D, and James R, (2011), Evaluation the Use of Web Conferencing Software to Enhance Flexible Curriculum Delivery, Ireland International Conference in Education, Dublin, Ireland Handelzalts A, (2009), Collaborative curriculum development in teacher design teams. Enschede: University of Twente,. Lumpe AT,.(2007), Research‐based professional development: teachers engaged in professional learning communities. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 2007, 18 (1), 125–128. Ross M (2003), An Alternative Approach to an Honours Degree , Proceeding of the IEE Engineering Education, Southampton, UK, 2003, ISSN number 0963‐3308 Ross M, Staples G, and Udall M, (2009), Teaching Professional Issues using Activity Based Learning, INSPIRE conference, Southampton, UK, Udall M, and Ross M (2012), SFIAplus in the Curriculum, SFIA in Education and Workplace, Learning conference, Milton Keynes, UK, Uhomoibhi J, and Ross M, (2012), Engineering Professional Development and Economic Growth: Issues of Collaboration between Academic, Industry and Professional Organisations for the Benefit of Employment and Sustainability, ICEE 2012, Finland Uhomoibhi J, and Ross M, (2010), Actions to Address the Shortage of Future STEM Professionals, especially in ICT subjects, by Universities and Professional Bodies, ISTE conference, South Africa, 2010 Valtanen J, Berki E, Georgiadou E, Hatzipanagos S, Ross M, Stamelos I, and Staples G, (2011), The Problem and its Features in Higher Education IT Curricula ‐ Professionals’ and Students’ Views, INSPIRE conference proceedings, Educational Quality Issues, ISBN number 978 1 907382 45 1, Loughborough, UK.

408

An Open and Interactive Multimedia e‐Learning Module for Graphing Kinematics Carlton Watson and Vernal Brathwaite Physics Department, The School of Mathematics, Physics and Technology, The College of the Bahamas, Nassau, Bahamas cwatson@cob.edu.bs vercar42@gmail.com Abstract: The ability to create, interpret and derive kinematics quantities from graphs are important skills for students in introductory physics classes. Despite the importance, there have been several studies that document students' difficulties in mastering these skills even after completing an introductory physics course. While there is a plethora of open educational learning materials devoted to kinematics, to the best of our knowledge, there have been very few open and interactive materials specifically designed to improve students' understanding of kinematic graphs. In this paper, we describe the development and application of an open and interactive multimedia physics e‐learning module. The module, which is geared towards pre‐college and first year college students with little prior knowledge of physics, aims to improve students understanding of kinematics; and their ability to create, interpret and determine kinematic quantities from position‐time, velocity‐time and acceleration‐time graphs. In this first trial we utilise the module as a supplement to traditional instruction in kinematics; however, the module can be delivered as a full stand‐alone substitution for traditional instruction. Using the Test of Understanding Graphs in Kinematics (TUG‐K) test, with students selected from The College of The Bahamas, we test the efficacy of this module to improve students understanding of kinematic graphs. Keywords: kinematics, graphs, e‐learning, multimedia, open, physics

1. Introduction One of the major discoveries by the physics education research (PER) community has been the degree to which students misconceptions about basic physics remain unchanged even after they have successfully completed an introductory course in physics (Halloun and Hestenes 1985). In many instances, it has been demonstrated that traditional instruction does little to correct these misconceptions. Therefore, a great deal of activity within the PER community has been directed towards identify misconceptions and other deficiencies; and developing learning materials and techniques that effectively address them. Some of the earliest and most comprehensive work has been devoted to the areas of kinematics and forces; however, the body of physics education research that investigates misconceptions has grown to include concepts and topics in electricity and magnetism (Maloney et al. 2001); optics (Galili and Hazan 2000); thermodynamics (Self et al. 2008); and quantum physics (Styer 1996). In many cases, the first line of inquiry is to develop a concept inventory that effectively tests for misconceptions. The Force Concept Inventory (Hestenes, Wells and Swackhamer 1992) and the Conceptual Survey on Electricity and Magnetism (Maloney et al. 2001) are examples of popular concepts inventories that have been developed and have found great utility in PER. These diagnostic tests and the subsequent research they spur have been so effective in addressing learning deficiencies and misconceptions that concepts inventories have been developed for many subjects including mechanical engineering (Midkiff, Litzinger and Evans 2001), statistics (Stone 2003), biology ( Garvin‐Doxas and Klymkowsky 2008), chemistry (Krause et al. 2004) and astronomy (Hufnagel 2001). Research also suggest that students’ learning in kinematics is enhanced by their ability to navigate among the multiple representations i.e, pictures, graphs, words, equations or vectors, of a particular problem or solution. Ainsworth posits that there are three main functions multiple representations serve in learning: 1) establishing complementary roles, 2) constraining interpretation and 3) constructing deeper understanding (Ainsworth 1999). However, despite this ideal, many students still have difficulty with and fail to appreciate the translation from one representation to another. In particular, several studies have shown that many students have difficulties interpreting and constructing kinematic graphs when given word problems or descriptions (McDermott, Rosenquist and Van Zee 1987). For example, two common misinterpretations that students make when interpreting and constructing kinematic graphs are slope/height confusion and interpreting the graph as a literal picture (Clement 1985). Many students fail to correctly identify the maximum velocity on a position time graph as the segment of the graph with the greatest slope; instead they often chose the segment with the largest value based on the position axis. Furthermore, if asked to draw the velocity‐time graph of an object

409

Carlton Watson and Vernal Brathwaite going uphill or downhill at constant speed they produce a graph that is sloping upward or downwards; or if given a graph with a ‘bump’ or ‘curve’ they misinterpret these to be physical bumps or curves. These and other common misconceptions/misinterpretations have led researchers to develop several approaches to improve students’ proficiency in interpreting and constructing graphs. Many of these approaches, which utilise microcomputers under laboratory like conditions, have been demonstrated to significantly improve student’s ability to interpret and construct kinematic graphs (Jerry and Aaron 2010; Molefe, Lemmer and Smit 2005; Araujo, Veit and Moreira 2008; Svec 1999). Our review of the literature however, suggests a paucity of research that explores the development of learning modules suitable for a purely stand alone, distance education e‐learning modality. In this paper we lay the foundation for an open e‐ learning module that can be used as stand‐alone lecture in kinematics and graphs by pre‐college and introductory college physics students.

2. Methodology General Design Students were chosen at random and assigned to the either one of two groups: A traditional group or a supplemental group. Both groups of students were given traditional instruction in kinematics. Within a time frame ranging from one week to two and a half weeks, the students in the supplemental group were exposed to approximately ninety minutes of additional self‐paced instruction of the e‐learning kinematic module. Within three days of administering the supplemental instruction, students were given the Test of Understanding Graphs in Kinematics (TUG‐K) diagnostic test (Beichner 1994). We utilise a posttest‐only two‐ group randomised experimental design to test for the efficacy of our supplemental instruction. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and the student t‐tests to test for the null hypothesis i.e, there is no difference in performance on the TUG‐K by either group of students. Learning Module We designed a learning module on kinematics. The module consists of lecture notes, audio, video animation, quizzes, examples and interactive exercises. A key component of the modules is a JavaScript interactive graphing programme (based on the jQuery and jqPlot libraries) that generates random problems requiring students to interpret word problems and construct kinematic graphs under stationary, constant velocity and constant acceleration conditions. The programme also allows the instructional designer to control the amount of feedback students receive. While we have not strictly adhered to any one instructional design approach, our general approach is based on Mayer’s cognitive theory of multimedia learning (CTML) (Mayer and Moreno 2003). CTML integrates several theories including dual code theory (Paivio 1986), generative learning theory (Wittrock 1974) and cognitive load theory (Sweller 1988) to arrive at the following conclusions:

people have two separate audio and video channels for processing information;

these channels have limited capacity; and

learning involves the selection, organisation and integration of information via these channels.

The utility of Mayer’s work is his formulation of guidelines regarding the inclusion and development of multimedia learning materials to maximise learning and problem‐solving transfer; and minimise cognitive load. A schematic of CTML is presented below. More recently, the efficacy of multimedia learning modules over a traditional textbook in a college level physics course was demonstrated (Stelzer et al. 2010). In addition to improvements in learning, the study demonstrated that students’ perception of content difficulty significantly decreased and that their overall favourability ratings of the course increased when they used the multimedia modules. While there is some debate as to the source of the learning gains achieved by learning materials developed using multimedia learning (Clark and Feldon 2005)., there are enough successful examples of multimedia based learning modules to convince us of its overall efficacy; even if the learning gains are not inherently due to multimedia learning as Clark and Feldon suggests. In addition to ideas from CTML, we emphasise worked examples in accordance with the worked example principle which has been demonstrated to improve learning for novice learners (Van Gog, Kester and Paas 2011). The learning assets were compiled and sequenced using

410

Carlton Watson and Vernal Brathwaite commercially available e‐learning authoring software, however, in principle there are several open source alternative that could have easily been used. Finally, the entire module was exported as an HTML5 document. This is consistent with one of the programmes primary outcomes of producing open learning materials.

Figure 1: Schematic of the processes involved in the cognitive theory of multimedia learning model ‐ taken from (Mayer and Moreno 2003)

Figure 2: Example of a) an interactive slide and b) and animation from the kinematics lesson module Participants Participants were chosen at random from two groups of students enrolled in physics courses at the College of The Bahamas during the spring 2013 semester: PHYS071 a college preparatory or remedial physics course and PHYS164 – an introductory algebra based college physics courses. The PHYS071 group consisted of 19 students and all but one student had no prior exposure to physics. The one student had taken but did not meet the minimum threshold of a C grade, on their high school national exams; The Bahamas General Certificate of Secondary Education (BGCSE). Of the 19 students in the PHYS071 Group, 9 students were exposed to the supplemental instruction in addition to the traditional instruction. The PHYS164 group consisted of 21 students. All students in the group had either earned a grade of C or better on The BGCSE Physics examination or had successful passed PHYS071. Of the 21 students in the PHYS164 Group, 11 students were exposed to the supplemental instruction in addition to the traditional instruction. Students were not informed in advance but within three days following the supplemental instruction all students were given the TUG‐K test. Instrument We utilised the TUG‐K which is a researched based diagnostic test designed to test students’ understanding of kinematics. The test is comprised of 21 questions and 7 objectives which are classified in the Table 1. In this study we examined students’ aggregate performance on the TUG‐K as opposed to their performance on specific objectives targets.

411

Carlton Watson and Vernal Brathwaite Table 1: The seven objectives of The TUG‐K test Given

The Student Will

1 Position‐time graph

Determine velocity

2 Velocity‐time graph

Determine acceleration

3 Velocity‐time graph

Determine displacement

4 Acceleration‐time graph

Determine change in velocity

5 A kinematics graph

Select another corresponding graph

6 A kinematics graph

Select textual description

7 Textual motion description

Select corresponding graph

3. Results The results below show the individual scores (out of 21) of the 21 students in the PHYS164 Group and the 19 students in the PHYS071 Group. Table 2: TUG‐K scores by the PHYS164 group #

Supplemental Traditional

N/A

Table 3: TUG‐K scores by the PHYS071 group #

Supplemental Traditional

N/A

412

Carlton Watson and Vernal Brathwaite Using this data we were able to test for differences in performance between students who had received only traditional instruction and those who had received the additional supplemental instruction. The tables below show the results of our calculations using the student t‐test. Table 4: Analysis of TUG‐K scores by the PHYS164 group PHYS 164 n 2 d df t tcritical

Supplemental 11 9.09 15.28 3.91

Traditional 10 6.20 16.16 4.02

1.73 19 2.14 2.09

Table 5: Analysis of TUG‐K scores by the PHYS164 group PHYS 071 n 2 d df t tcritical

Supplemental

Traditional

9 5.11 5.11 2.26

10 1.70 2.89 2.1 1.01 17 3.39 2.11

where n = number of data points; μ = the mean; σ2 = the variance; df = the degrees of freedom; = the variance of the difference between the means; t = the calculated t value; and tcritical = the critical two‐tail t value at 95% confidence The t values suggest a rejection of the null hypothesis at 95% confidence levels. Using Cohen’s d (d = (μ1 – μ2)/σ), we were able to calculate effect sizes of 0.93 and 1.5 for the PHYS164 and PHYS071 student groups respectively. Based on these d values the effects on both groups can be categorised as a ‘big effect’.

4. Discussion The TUG‐K scores by both sets of students were lower than expected; however, as expected, in terms of raw scores, the PHYS164 students performed much better than the PHYS071 students. Based on t values, however, the PHYS071 seemed to have benefited most from the supplemental instruction. While it may be tempting to claim that the supplemental instruction is solely responsible for the observed learning gains, we are cautious about such claims. In particular, the significant difference in time between the traditional and the supplemental instructions (between one and two and a half weeks) make it difficult to rule out timing effects. It may seem intuitive to assume that the greater the time difference between the two sets of instruction the greater the apparent learning gains on the TUG‐K. This may also lead one to assume that the gains would be greater for the PHYS164 students ( tcritical – t = 0.05 ; d = 0.95) since they experienced a two and a half week lag between traditional and supplemental instruction, compared to a one week lag for the PHYS071 students ( tcritical – t = 1.28 ; d = 1.5) . However, we observed the opposite as the apparent learning gains were greater for the PHYS071 students. This leads us to assume that timing effects were not a critical or dominant factor. Furthermore, there have been several studies that suggest that retention is improved with multimedia learning, see for example (Issa, Cox and Killingsworth 1999). This lends further support to our assumption that

413

Carlton Watson and Vernal Brathwaite the one and a half week difference in the delivery of the traditional and supplemental instruction may not be have skewed the data significantly in favour of supplemental instruction.

5. Conclusions and future work This work is an ongoing effort to develop and verify the effectiveness of an open e‐learning resource for kinematics and graphing. While limited by the small population size and questions about timing effects, we are encouraged by the results of this first trial and believe that is not unreasonable to assume that most of the learning gains achieved are due to the e‐learning module. Future work will focus on investigating the module as a full stand‐alone e‐learning module for instruction in kinematics. This will allow us to make easier side by side comparisons between traditional instruction and the e‐learning multimedia instruction; and should enable us to rule out any timing effects. Finally, instead of aggregate scores on the TUG‐K we will investigate student’s performance on each of the objectives of the TUG‐ K. To do this we will use a pre‐test/post‐test analysis and use concentration analysis (Bao and Redish 2001), or similar, to measure the degree to which individual objectives of TUG‐K test are met.

Acknowledgements The authors wish to acknowledge The College of The Bahamas for its financial support of this research. We also wish to thank Dr. Claude McNamarah and Mr. Joseph Farley for providing access to their students; Dr. Maria Oriakhi Chair of The school of Mathematics, Physics and Technology for her kind assistance; Ms. Victoria Cartwright and Ms. Alicia Smith for assisting with the data collection; and Ms. Ally Watson for her review of this paper.

References Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33(2), 131‐152. Araujo, I. S., Veit, E. A., and Moreira, M. A. (2008). Physics students’ performance using computational modelling activities to improve kinematics graphs interpretation. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1128‐1140 Bao, L., and Redish, E. F. (2001). Concentration analysis: A quantitative assessment of student states. American Journal of Physics, 69, S45. Beichner, R. J. (1994). Testing student interpretationof kinematics graphs. Am. J. Phys, 62, 8. Clark, R. E., and Feldon, D. F. (2005). Five common but questionable principles of multimedia learning. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, 97‐115. Clement, J. (1985, July). Misconceptions in graphing. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education(Vol. 1, pp. 369‐375). Utrecht,, The Netherlands: Utrecht University. Galili, I., and Hazan, A. (2000). Learners' knowledge in optics: interpretation, structure and analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 57‐88. Garvin‐Doxas, K., and Klymkowsky, M. W. (2008). Understanding randomness and its impact on student learning: lessons learned from building the Biology Concept Inventory (BCI). CBE‐Life Sciences Education, 7(2), 227‐233. Halloun, I. A., and Hestenes, D. (1985). The initial knowledge state of college physics students. American journal of Physics, 53(11), 1043‐1055. Hufnagel, B. (2001). Development of the astronomy diagnostic test. Astronomy Education Review, 1, 47. Issa, R. R., Cox, R. F., & Killingsworth, C. F. (1999). Impact of multimedia‐based instruction on learning and retention. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 13(4), 281‐290. Jerry, T. F. L., and Aaron, C. C. E. (2010, June). The impact of augmented reality software with inquiry‐based learning on students' learning of kinematics graph. In Education Technology and Computer (ICETC), 2010 2nd International Conference on (Vol. 2, pp. V2‐1). IEEE. Krause, S., Birk, J., Bauer, R., Jenkins, B., and Pavelich, M. J. (2004, October). Development, testing, and application of a chemistry concept inventory. In Frontiers in Education, 2004. FIE 2004. 34th Annual (pp. T1G‐1). IEEE. Maloney, D. P., O’Kuma, T. L., Hieggelke, C. J., and Van Heuvelen, A. (2001). Surveying students’ conceptual knowledge of electricity and magnetism. American Journal of Physics, 69, S12. Mayer, R. E., and Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 43‐52. McDermott, L. C., Rosenquist, M. L., and Van Zee, E. H. (1987). Student difficulties in connecting graphs and physics: Examples from kinematics. cal,1, 2. Molefe, N. P. J., Lemmer, M., and Smit, J. J. A. (2005). Comparison of the learning effectiveness of computer‐based and conventional experiments in science education. South African journal of education, 25(1), 50‐55. Paivio, A (1986). Mental representations: a dual coding approach. Oxford. England: Oxford University Press Self, B. P., Miller, R. L., Kean, A., Moore, T. J., Ogletree, T., and Schreiber, F. (2008, October). Important student misconceptions in mechanics and thermal science: identification using model‐eliciting activities. In Frontiers in Education Conference, 2008. FIE 2008. 38th Annual (pp. S2G‐1). IEEE.

414

Carlton Watson and Vernal Brathwaite Stelzer, T., Brookes, D. T., Gladding, G., and Mestre, J. P. (2010). Impact of multimedia learning modules on an introductory course on electricity and magnetism. American Journal of Physics, 78, 755. Stone, A., Allen, K., Rhoads, T. R., Murphy, T. J., Shehab, R. L., and Saha, C. (2003, November). The statistics concept inventory: A pilot study. In Frontiers in Education, 2003. FIE 2003 33rd Annual (Vol. 1, pp. T3D‐1). IEEE. Styer, D. F. (1996). Common misconceptions regarding quantum mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 64, 31. Svec, M. (1999). Improving Graphing Intrepretation Skills and Understanding of Motion Using Microcomputer Based Laboratories. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 3(4). Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning.Cognitive science, 12(2), 257‐285. Van Gog, T., Kester, L., and Paas, F. (2011). Effects of worked examples, example‐problem, and problem‐example pairs on novices’ learning.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(3), 212‐218. Wittrock, M. C. (1974). Learning as a generative process 1. Educational Psychologist, 11(2), 87‐95.

415

Enhancing Creative Problem Solving in the Higher Education Curriculum Through the use of Innovative e‐Learning Technologies Denise Wood1 and Carolyn Bilsborow2 1 University of South Australia and the University of the Western Cape, South Africa 2 University of South Australia, Australia denise.wood@unisa.edu.au Abstract: The importance of fostering graduate skills in creativity and innovation is acknowledged by higher education institutions (HEIs) and employers. However, the lack of practical guidelines and a scaffold to guide educators in the design and redevelopment of their courses is a significant impediment to the goal of embedding creativity within the curriculum. This paper reports on the findings from a project funded through the Office for Learning and Teaching, Higher Education Division, Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education in Australia, which aimed to address these challenges by developing a framework and supporting online tool to scaffold educators and students through a creative problem solving approach. Following a design‐based research (DBR) methodology, the study employed a mixed‐methods approach involving multiple iterations to design, develop, trial and implement a creative problem solving (CPS) framework and tool, which has been trialled in ten courses across different disciplines and HEIs across Australia. The outcomes from these trials have informed the development of principles and practical guidelines for application in the classroom in a range of contexts, both nationally and internationally. The findings reported in this paper focus on the DBR process and the experience of trials of the CPS tool in one of the ten courses included in the study; a first‐ year undergraduate course offered in the School of Communication, International Studies and Languages at the University of South Australia. Educator and student evaluations conducted at the conclusion of each offering of the course show the benefits of the CPS approach, with educators stating that students who use the CPS tool demonstrate much greater creativity and divergence in the approaches they adopt in their digital media research assignments, and many students reporting greater confidence in their ability to generate ideas for their research and to come up with alternative and sophisticated solutions to creative problems. The evaluations also identified several usability issues, which were addressed through the multiple iterations and trials that informed each stage of the redesign of the tool. The final section of this paper discusses the implications of the findings from this project and the benefits of design‐based research as a methodology informing the design, development and implementation of technology enhanced learning innovations. Keywords: creativity, creative problem solving, design‐based research, undergraduate research, technology enhanced learning

1. Background Craft (2006) has suggested that “Surviving and thriving in the twenty‐first century require a sort of 'personal effectiveness' in coping well with unknown territory and in recognising and making choices” (p. 19) and creative capacity building can empower workers to “persevere in the face of complexity and unresolvability” (McWilliam & Haukka 2008, p. 660). However, even though many HEIs acknowledge the importance of creativity within the curriculum (McWilliam 2007b), most programs are structured around achieving certain graduate attributes that elevate traditional education methodologies and practice based on knowledge acquisition and retention, rather than creativity and the arts (Gluth & Corso 2009; Robinson 1998). This is particularly challenging in disciplinary fields outside of the humanities. There are also many pressures on educators in HEIs such as intolerance to ambiguity, lack of time and space for experimentation, fear of making mistakes, high levels of stress, and the lack of a sense of challenge (Byron 2007), which contribute further to their resistance to embedding creativity in the curriculum. Tosey (2006) argues that the pedagogical approaches more often employed in the higher education curriculum are designed “to converge and control” (p. 35) rather than to facilitate creativity “at the edge of order” (Fullan cited in Tosey, p. 34) and as Jackson (2006) asserts, educators need to change their approach from penalising mistakes to accepting that making “mistakes” provides important lessons for learning. Another potential reason that HEIs have failed to embrace creativity in the curriculum more widely across different disciplinary fields is the lack of a concise definition of creativity within policy documentation (McWilliam 2007a). Edwards (2000) suggests that the term ‘creativity’ has an amorphous nature and has traditionally been regarded as an innate ability that is only possessed by an exceptional few, even though numerous research studies have shown the benefits of fostering the creativity of all learners (Csikszentmihalyi 1982; McWilliam 2007a). Researchers also recongise the complex and multifaceted nature of human

416

Denise Wood and Carolyn Bilsborow intelligence (Robinson 2001) and that creativity is enriched by other capacities and learner motivations (Robinson 2001), as well as cultural context. A third barrier to implementing creativity in the HEI relates to the lack of strategies to help teachers develop the skills to engage with creativity “intentionally as an outcome of pedagogical work” (McWilliam 2007a, p. 4). While it is evident that fostering creativity requires a curriculum that provides opportunities for challenging students through “novel and unpredictable” activites (Jackson, 2003 cited in Jackson 2006, p. 213), the strategies for achieving this goal are not yet well understood by educators or HEIs. The project reported in this paper set out to address these challenges through a DBR approach to the development of a framework and online CPS tool designed to facilitate creativity in the HEI curriculum to better prepare graduates for the challenges of an uncertain future and develop their abilities to solve complex problems. The theoretical framework, which provided the foundation for the research, is described in the following section.

2. A systems approach to creativity Creativity involves producing novel and useful ideas or products (Dewett 2003). Amabile (1996) identifies three components of creative performance: 1) domain‐relevant skills; 2) creativity‐relevant processes; and 3) task motivation. This approach to creative problem solving is consistent with Csikszentmihalyi’s (1999) systems approach in recognising that domain‐relevant skills (for example, facts, principles, technical skills, and opinions) are required for a learner to be able to assess the range of response possibilities and to be able to synthesise the information against which the new response is to be judged (Csikszentmihalyi 1999; Dewett 2003). Creativity‐relevant processes determine the degree to which a learner’s response will surpass previous responses in the domain (Dewett 2003), while task motivation refers to the learner’s attitude and motivations for undertaking the task as well as his/her understanding about why the task is being engaged (Amabile 1996; Dewett 2003). Again, consistent with (Csikszentmihalyi (1991), Amabile agrees that creativity is more likely to be facilitated when the task is intrinsically motivating (the experience of learning is its own reward) (Csikszentmihalyi 1991). Creative Problem‐Solving (CPS) has its roots in the work of Alex Osborn (1953) who developed CPS as an aid to the understanding the different phases of creative problem‐solving (Isaksen and Dorval, 1993). The approach was modified in 1967 by Sydney Parnes and thereafter became known as the Osborn‐Parnes CPS model comprising three major stages (exploring the challenge, generating ideas, and preparing for action) incorporating six steps: 1) objective finding; 2) fact finding; 3) problem finding; 4) generating ideas; 5) solution finding; and 6) acceptance finding (Creative Education Foundation, 2010). The model is depicted as a cycle recognising the need for flexibility and that creativity tends to function in a more cyclical than linear pattern. It should be noted also that all of these approaches acknowledge the iterative nature of the problem solving process and the need for both divergent thinking (particularly during the early stages of the cycle) and convergent thinking as ideas are refined.

3. Design‐based research (DBR) approach Design‐based research emerged as a methodological approach in the 1990s (Brown, 1992; Collins, 1992) and has gained increasing popularity in response to growing recognition of the need for educational research which produces “new theories, artifacts, and practices that account for and potentially impact learning and teaching in naturalistic settings” (Barab & Squire 2004, p. 3). DBR has been found particularly useful for research involved in technology enhanced learning initiatives because the approach addresses complex problems in real contexts, builds on theory and design principles to implement technology enhanced innovations designed to address the identified complex problems and involves reflective inquiry in the process of designing, trialling and implementing innovative learning environments, while also leading to the creation of new design principles and practical guidelines for educators (McKenney & Reeves 2012; Reeves, Herrington & Oliver 2005; The Design‐Based Research Collective 2003). DBR was therefore deemed to be a suitable research approach for the study reported in this paper given the project’s aims to build on existing theories of creativity in the design and development of a framework and tool to scaffold educators in embedding creative problem solving in the higher education curriculum, while also developing a tool that students could use to help them to apply the principles in practice. In keeping with the characteristics of DBR, our research team comprises educators, researchers and designers working in collaboration, and the research approach has employed mix‐ methods with multiple iterations involving designing, developing, trialling, evaluating, reflecting and redesigning informed by each previous iteration.

417

Denise Wood and Carolyn Bilsborow

3.1 Research method The iterative nature of the systems life cycle adopted has involved formative evaluation throughout the project and revisions of the design of the CPS system in response to feedback from project team and reference group members, as well as from educators and students who have participated in trials of the CPS framework and CPS tool developed through the project. The stages of the DBR approach and the findings from each stage are documented in the following sections 3.1.1 Design of CPS framework informed by theories of creativity The framework developed for this study has been informed by the seminal literature on creativity (Csikszentmihalyi 1982, 1991, 1996; Guilford 1950; Torrance 1978) and contemporary research such as Amabile’s (1996) componential framework of creativity and Titus’s (2000) CPS model. Our adapted CPS framework involves six stages (Figure 1), which correspond closely to the Titus (2000) model (see Wood et al 2012 for further details). In our revised model, idea generation is embedded in each stage of the process with alternating divergent and convergent ideation, shifting toward convergent thinking by the final stages of validation and completion/implementation (Brophy 1998). Our model also recognises the impact of the domain, field, and individual factors (Csikszentmihalyi 1999).

Figure 1: A systems approach to creative problem solving (CPS) adapted from Amabile (1996), Csikszentmihalyi (1999) and Titus (2000) 3.1.2 Preliminary trials of CPS framework in first‐year undergraduate course ‘Introduction to Digital Media (IDM)’ is a first year undergraduate course offered in the School of Communication, International Studies and Languages at the University of South Australia. The aim of the course is to introduce students to the principles of digital media through a practice‐led research approach. Prior attempts at engaging students in research had proved challenging (see Wood 2010, 2009a, 2009b for detailed discussion of the results of formal evaluations). The three assignments in the course build on each other and are designed to lead students through a practice‐based research approach involving researching the services and needs of a not‐for‐profit organisation and producing pre‐production documentation for a short promotional video clip for that organisation as the second assignment. Students then produce an associated website in which the promotional clip is embedded as their final assignment. In the 2009 and 2010 offerings of the course, students were asked to formulate their research using a paper‐ based version of the CPS framework designed to guide them through the idea generation process. This CPS model was supported through the use of a range of social media tools including an ‘ideas journal’ maintained

418

Denise Wood and Carolyn Bilsborow by students as a personal blog throughout the course, the use of a wiki to facilitate brainstorming and to encourage collaborative discussion supported by a discussion forum for peer review, as well as the use of a collaborative bookmarking site for the sharing of resources, and the use of YouTube enabling students to showcase their work to a broader audience and respond to their feedback. Several key themes emerged from the application of CPS in this course (see also, Wood 2010, 2009a, 2009b) as reported by teachers through informal feedback and students via anonymous online course evaluations conducted at the completion of each offering of the course:

Teachers reported much greater creativity and divergence in the approaches students adopted in their digital media research assignments.

Students reported greater confidence in their ability to generate ideas for their research projects.

Several students noted that CPS was critical to the success of their research.

Most students enjoyed the collaboration with their peers and noted that the use of peer review facilitated via the discussion forum helped them to improve on their work.

One student suggested that “I thoroughly enjoyed this topic as it was highly creative and we were given a high degree of creative freedom despite having to work within the limitations set down”.

Another commented “The creativity component challenged my technical ability” and another reflected on the link between research and creative thinking, “It was more research based and required a lot of creative thinking”.

Creativity and problem solving developed through practice‐led research was a commonly recurring theme in most student comments as this student’s feedback indicates, “Creative idea generation methods ... helped me to think very deeply and come up with alternative and sophisticated solutions to creative problems”.

While most students welcomed the brainstorming approach to idea generation implemented early in the course, two students commented that it was just “mind mapping” and nothing particularly innovative; even though they acknowledged that the approach might be useful for “other” students; “It might work for some people but not so well for others. Only really suits a few types of learners”. Another challenge encountered in using the ‘ideas’ blog for scaffolding throughout the IDM course, was the tendency for some students to post their reflections to their blogs in the week in which the assignments are assessed. This finding suggests that some students are not sufficiently “in the flow” (Csikszentmihalyi 1996) to maintain focus on the creative problem solving process throughout the duration of the semester. 3.1.3 Design of the CPS tool The CPS framework therefore required considerable revisions over time, and as noted in the more detailed case studies reported elsewhere (see Wood 2010, 2009a, 2009b), the outcomes from each subsequent offering of the course helped to improve on the approach throughout 2011. From the paper‐based version of the CPS framework, an online tool (Ingenium) was designed in late 2011 and early 2012. Ingenium incorporates the five stages of the CPS process with sub‐sections comprising questions and prompts related to each of the five stages, which students access via arrows on each page (Figure 2). Video clips are also included for each CPS stage to help guide students through the required tasks relevant to that stage. A ‘pencil’ icon provides students with a link to a public blog site where they could set up and access their own blog account and another icon (‘w’) provides students with a link through to the project wiki. A menu was placed on the right‐hand side of the interface providing students with a series of creativity tools including a ‘notebook’, ‘toolbox’ and ‘resources’ (Figure 2). These sections include links to social media and other supporting resources that the student might need to support them throughout the creative solving process. 3.1.4 Trials of Ingenium Preliminary trials of Ingenium were conducted in both semester one (Study Period 2; SP2) and semester two (Study Period 5; SP5) 2012. At the conclusion of the SP2 offering of the course students were invited to complete the university’s approved anonymous online course evaluation, which included three custom open‐ ended text questions designed to evaluate the students’ experience of the CPS process and use of the tool. Of

419

Denise Wood and Carolyn Bilsborow the 250 students enrolled in the course, only 19 (7.6%) completed the online evaluation and even fewer responded to the open ended questions. Nevertheless, student feedback combined with teachers’ observations and reflections on the experience did provide insight into the potential benefits and challenges in applying the tool in this first‐year course. Positive comments suggested that for at least some students the course encouraged students to explore creativity in ways that they had not experienced in courses with more traditional assignments as reflected by one student who stated that “It was a good course to express creativity through a different format, one that was more interesting than just the regular essay writing in others” and another who stated that “it helped to clarify the idea I had”. However, several students approached the task with a closed mind and did not engage in the creative problem solving task as indicated by comments such as “No, everyone already had their ideas to start with and in doing this did not further develop them or create them”. Some students also expressed frustration with the repetitive nature of the process indicating that the tool had not adequately reinforced the value of creativity occurring through a process of multiple iterations involving researching, designing, testing, refinement, collaboration and reflection.

Figure 2: Design of CPS original Ingenium tool Ingenium was trialled again in the same course in SP5 2012. At the conclusion of this offering of the course students were invited to complete an anonymous online survey, which included a mix of Likert‐scale and open ended text items about their experience using the Ingenium tool. Twenty‐seven students opted to complete this questionnaire and of those respondents, 48% reported that Ingenium raised their awareness of creative problem solving and that the tool helped them to think more creatively about their assignment; 41% indicated that they felt Ingenium would be useful to other areas of their studies; and 33% of students reported that they felt more confident about their creative skills after using the Ingenium. While one student “Found the tool a great catalyst for new directions in thinking” and another reported that it was a “Very good planning tool” others were challenged by the presentation of the interface as suggested by one student’s comment that “I found the site rather hard to use. It was hard to follow the layout of the information and contained a lot of writing that could be cut down to be more accessible and concise”. Students were also challenged by the amount of time it took to complete the process, as comments such as “The principles and techniques are good, but the presentation and long winded nature make it unusable” and “Thought it was very useable it was also slightly daunting because of the amount of subsections … this is incredibly tedious to work through” suggest. When asked what improvements should be made to the tool students suggested: “Better structural layout”; “Include some visuals”; “Perhaps find another way of presenting”; “It needs a complete overhaul design‐wise”.

420

Denise Wood and Carolyn Bilsborow 3.1.5 Redesign of CPS tool Based on the feedback from two semesters of trials in IDM in 2012, Ingenium was redesigned to include new video examples and text‐based instructions (Figure 3). During the SP5 2012 trial, one teacher had observed that students were not using the example videos, “The students would begin playing the video and only watch it for a few seconds before closing it”. In response to this observation, an animator was employed to replace the ‘talking‐head’ videos with short animations that were more visually engaging and replicated the stages of Ingenium. The text component of the tool was also overhauled during this version. The stages were renamed, for example ‘Problem Delineation’ was changed to ‘What’s the big picture?’ in response to student feedback suggesting that the language used was too abstract and not descriptive of the processes. The procedural text descriptions were also shortened in response to student feedback suggesting that the steps were too repetetive and long‐winded. The structure of Ingenium was also redesigned as a mind map (Figure 4). The previous version of Ingenium included a basic mind map tool and this was redeveloped to allow the student to record notes (both text and audio‐visual) about each stage of the creative solving process. This alternative non‐linear approach accompanied the original more linear framework.

Figure 3: Redesign of Ingenium with embedded video examples 3.1.6 Trials of redesigned CPS tool A new group of students enrolled in IDM undertook the same assignment to create the pre‐production for a promotional video clip, in the first semester (SP2) 2013. The students were encouraged to use the new mind mapping tool that would allow them to access the process in a non‐linear fashion, but during the trial, technical issues with the mind mapping tool were encountered and many of the students were forced to return to the original linear, step by step instruction approach. Sixty‐two students responded to the same anonymous online survey and their responses indicate an increase in the percentage of students who thought that their awareness of creative problem solving had been raised through using the tool increased by (48% in SP5 2012 to 55% in SP2 2013); 51% of students reported that the tool had helped them think creatively compared with 48% during the previous trial and 33% of students reported that they felt more confident about their creative skills after using the Ingenium, which remained the same as during the previous trial Many students responded favourably to the redesigned video examples with comments like “The youtube videos linked to the pages were useful” and one teacher observed that unlike the previous trials, more students watched the videos in their entirety. Issues encountered by the students included: “The mind map should be improved, as it is a useful tool but very unreliable”; “The saving system definitely needs improving”; “I liked how Ingenium was easy to use, however, I was not pleased with my mind map being entirely deleted

421

Denise Wood and Carolyn Bilsborow days before my assignment was due”; “Also the mind‐mapping software isn’t very aesthetically pleasing”; “Varying results with different web browsers and different computer architectures”; and “It would have been wicked but it crashed a lot”. When asked what improvements should be made to the tool, students reported that “The menu structure should be made more easy to understand”; “It just needs to be fine tuned so that the questions are less repetitive and the mind‐mapping section works”; and “Work primarily on the user interface and the rest will come, as will interest”.

Figure 4: Ingenium mind mapping tool 3.1.7 Further design revisions The student feedback from the three trials of Ingenium reported in the previous sections informed the next iteration of the design and development cycle. The major revisions included a move to a more robust approach to coding the site to avoid the cross‐browser compatibility issues reported by students, and the redesign of the entire interface as a mind map with engaging graphics representing each stage of the CPS and each sub‐ section (Figure 5).

Figure 5: Revised Ingenium mindmapping tool Students interact with each of the ‘post‐it’ note image links to the various CPS progresses to sub‐sections where they have access to an editor enabling them to embed their thoughts, research, images and links. A toolbar above Ingenium provides students with the ability to navigate back and forth in a linear or non‐linear approach as they work through the CPS stages. Students can also open a browser tab to access the web based framework and video examples as a scaffold for them as they undertake the CPS process. An additional feature has been added to Ingenium to enable students to print out the contents of each stage of the CPS process in an outline format.

422

Denise Wood and Carolyn Bilsborow The revised Ingenium tool will be trialled in subsequent offerings of IDM and other courses across a range of disciplinary fields in SP5 2013 and this feedback together with summative evaluation of the process and the tool will be undertaken. It is anticipated that student feedback will indicate that this final iteration of the design and development of Ingenium represents a significant improvement on earlier attempts to develop a CPS tool as a scaffold for students undertaking creative problem solving activities within their courses. The trials in other courses, together with the feedback obtained from trials of Ingenium in IDM will then be analysed to inform the development of principles and practical guidelines that educators can use when redesigning their courses to embed creativity within the curriculum. Summative evaluation will then be undertaken to assess the extent to which educators regard the CPS framework, tool and guidelines as helpful in guiding them through the design and redevelopment process.

4. Discussion and conclusion This paper outlines a project which sought to maximise the benefits of creative problem solving by developing a CPS framework and associated tool designed to scaffold students through the creative problem solving process and guide educators in the design and redevelopment of the curriculum. By employing a design‐based research approach, the project facilitated the development of a CPS tool informed by student and teacher feedback through multiple iterations involving design, development, trials, evaluation, collaboration, reflection and revision. Consistent with a DBR approach, the research built on a strong theoretical foundation informed by creativity theories and contemporary research showing the benefits of creative problem solving in education to address the challenges reported in the literature as inhibiting educators from incorporating creativity into their courses. The DBR approach outlined in this paper involved mixed methods design and multiple iterations undertaken in the “living laboratory” (Kafai 2005) of the online classroom to ensure the design and development process was informed directly by student and educator feedback. While this approach is not without its challenges (see for example Anderson & Shattuck 2012; Barab & Squire 2004) as the highly critical feedback by students to early iterations suggest, the approach demonstrates the value of research which seeks to address ‘real‐world’ problems through “an iterative research process that does not just evaluate an innovative product or intervention, but systematically attempts to refine the innovation while also producing design principles” (Amiel & Reeves 2008, p. 34). The findings highlight the potential of CPS in the undergraduate curriculum as well as some of the challenges, with specific reference to the experience trialling the framework and tool in a first year course. The trials have also highlighted strategies that might be employed to better engage students in creative problem solving. The DBR approach employed in this study demonstrates the effective use of evidence to inform practice multi‐disciplinary collaboration and consideration of strategies designed to ensure the long term impact and sustainability of the project through the planned future trials of the CPS approach across a broad range of disciplines in other institutions and contexts. In adopting this approach, the project has sought to ensure that the key factors shown to contribute to successful outcomes from technology enhanced learning and teaching initiatives (Keppell, Suddaby & Hard 2011, p. 24) are addressed. Finally, our experience employing DBR as the preferred methodological approach to research of this kind highlights the value that should be placed on students being integrally involved in the design and development of technology enhanced learning innovations. Future research using this DBR approach to further develop the CPS tool informed by trials across a broader range of disciplinary fields and in other HEIs aims to ensure the flexibility, adaptability, suitability and sustainability of the approach across the HEI sector.

References Amabile, T. M. (1996) Creativity in Context: Update to the Social Psychology of Creativity, Westview, Boulder, CO. Amiel, T. & Reeves, T. C. (2008) “Design‐Based Research and Educational Technology: Rethinking Technology and the Research Agenda”, Journal of Educational Technology & Society, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 29‐40. Anderson, T. & Shattuck, J. (2012) “Design‐Based Research: A Decade of Progress in Education Research?”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 16‐25. Barab, S. & Squire, K. (2004) “Design‐Based Research: Putting a Stake in the Ground”, Journal of the Learning Sciences, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 1‐14. Brophy, D. R. (1998) “Understanding, Measuring, and Enhancing Individual Creative Problem‐Solving Efforts”, Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, p. 123. Brown, Ann L. (1992) “Design Experiments: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges in Creating Complex Interventions in Classroom Settings”, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 141‐178. doi: 10.2307/1466837 Collins, A. (1992) “Towards a Design Science of Education”. In E. Scanlon & T. O'Shea (Eds.), New Directions in Educational Technology (pp. 15‐22), Springer, Berlin.

423

Denise Wood and Carolyn Bilsborow Craft, A. (2006) “Creativity in schools”. In N. Jackson et al (Eds.), Developing Creativity in Higher Education: An Imaginative Curriculum (pp. 19‐28), Routledge, London. Creative Education Foundation (2010) “What is CPS?” [online], Creative Education Foundation, http://www.creativeeducationfoundation.org/?page_id=41 Czikszentmihalyi, M. (1982) “Intrinsic Motivation and Effective Teaching: A Flow Analysis”, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Vol. 10, pp. 15‐26. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991) “Thoughts About Education. Creating the Future”, Perspectives on Educational Change, pp. 83– 86. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996) Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention, Harper Collins, New York. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999) “Implications of a Systems Perspective for the Study of Creativity”. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity, Cambridge University Press, UK. Dewett, T. (2003) “Understanding the Relationship Between Information Technology and Creativity in Organizations”, Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 15, No. 2/3, p. 167. Edwards, S. M. (2000) “The Technology Paradox: Efficiency Versus Creativity”, Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 221‐228. Gluth, S., & Corso, R. (2009) “The Application of Creative Thinking Methodologies to Post Graduate Entrepreneurship Education”, Paper presented at the Sixth Annual AGSE International Entrepreneurship and Innovation Research Exchange, Adelaide. Guilford, J. P. (1950) “Creativity”, American Psychologist, Vol 5, No. 9, pp. 444‐454. Isaksen, S. & Dorval, K. (1993) “Changing Views of Creative Problem Solving: Over 40 Years of Continuous Improvement” [online], http://www.buffalostate.edu/orgs/cbir/readingroom/html/Isaksen‐Dorval‐93.html Jackson, N. (2006) “Imagining a Different World”. In N. Jackson, M. Oliver, M. Shaw & J. Wisdom (Eds.), Developing Creativity in Higher Education: An Imaginative Curriculum (pp. 1‐9), Routledge, London and New York. Kafai, Y. B. (2005) “The Classroom as “Living Laboratory”: Design‐based Research for Understanding, Comparing, and Evaluating Learning Science through Design, Educational Technology, January/February, pp. 28–34. Keppell, M., Suddaby, G. & Hard, N. (2011) “Good Practice Report: Technology‐Enhanced Learning and Teaching” [online], Australian Learning and Teaching Council commissioned report, http://www.olt.gov.au/resource‐good‐practice‐ report‐technology‐enhanced‐learning‐and‐teaching‐2011 McKenney, S. & Reeves, T. C. 2013 “Systematic Review of Design‐Based Research Progress: Is a Little Knowledge a Dangerous Thing?”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 42, No. 2, 2013, pp. 97‐100. McWilliam, E. (2007a) “Is Creativity Teachable? Conceptualising the Creativity/Pedagogy Relationship in Higher Education”, Proceedings 30th HERDSA Annual Conference: Enhancing Higher Education, Theory and Scholarship, Adelaide. McWilliam, E. (2007b) Developing Pedagogical Models for Building Creative Workforce Capacities in Undergraduate Students. Final Fellowship Report. Australian Learning and Teaching Council. McWilliam, E., & Haukka, S. (2008) “Educating the Creative Workforce: New Directions for Twenty‐First Century Schooling”, British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 34, No. 5, pp. 651 ‐ 666. Reeves, T., Herrington, J. & Oliver, R. (2005) “Design Research: A Socially Responsible Approach to Instructional Technology Research in Higher Education”, Journal of Computing in Higher Education, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 96‐115. Robinson, K. (1998) All Our Futures: Creativity, Culture and Education (The Robinson Report), National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education, London. Robinson, K. (2001) Out of Our Minds: Learning to be Creative, Capstone Publishing, London. The Design Based Research Collective, (2003) “Design‐Based Research: An Emerging Paradigm for Educational Inquiry”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 5‐8. Titus, P. A. (2000) Marketing and the Creative Problem‐Solving Process, Journal of Marketing Education, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 225‐235. Torrance, E. P. (1978) “Developing Creativity Instructional Materials According to the Osborn‐Parnes Creative Problem Solving Model”, Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 80‐90. Tosey, P. (2006) “Interfering with the Interference: An Emergent Perspective on Creativity in Higher Education”. In N. Jackson, M. Oliver, M. Shaw & J. Wisdom (Eds.), Developing Creativity in Higher Education: An Imaginative Curriculum. (pp. 19‐28), Routledge, London. Wood, D. (2010) “Transforming the First‐Year Learning Experience through Research Based Media Practice”, International Journal of First Year in Higher Education, Vol. 1, p. 1, pp. 31‐42. Wood, D. (2009a) “Challenges to Strengthening the Teaching and Research Nexus in the First‐ Year Undergraduate Curriculum”, The International Journal of Learning, Vol. 15, No. 12, pp. 111‐120. Wood, D. (2009b) “A Scaffolded Approach to Developing Students’ Skills and Confidence to Participate in Self and Peer Assessment”, Proceedings of the ATN Assessment Conference, Melbourne Wood, D., Lindsay, N., Gluth, S., Corso, R., and Bilsborow, C. (2011) “Facilitating Creative Problem Solving in the Marketing Curriculum in Response to the Demands of the Networked Information Society”, Proceedings of the 2011 AMS World Marketing Congress (WMC), Reims, France, July 19‐July 23.

424

To Scratch or not to Scratch – a Reflection Malie Zeeman North‐West University, Vanderbijlpark, South Africa Malie.Zeeman@nwu.ac.za Abstract: This paper investigates the extent to which the Scratch programming language has been accepted as an electronic teaching tool among teachers in South Africa. Information Technology (IT) was identified as a scarce skill in the Birchwood Declaration (2007) released by the South African Department of Education, a problem compounded by the declining number of the students who enrol in IT‐subjects at school. Scratch was introduced as an eLearning tool in the IT curriculum as part of an effort to address this issue (NCS 2012). Through the use of this tool, learners can be taught basic programming principles in a visual and interactive way. Although several studies on Scratch as a programming teaching tool have been conducted in other countries, such as the United States of America, the aim of this study is to determine how teachers in South Africa perceive the use of Scratch as a teaching tool during the first year of implementation. A mixed‐ method research approach, utilising both qualitative and quantitative research methods, was selected. The findings show a definite change in the attitude of teachers towards Scratch as an eLearning tool, from initial scepticism to a more positive attitude later on in the year. However, some concerns were raised which should be noted and addressed in order to ensure that this tool adds value to the teaching and learning experience in class. The findings of this study could pave the way for the implementation of Scratch at first‐year level, particularly as an introduction to programming courses. This could serve to bridge the gap between the schooling system and university in terms of the development of critical thinking‐skills. Keywords: scratch, programming language, computer science, education

1. Introduction Students’ interest in studying computer programming has declined in some countries in recent years (Koorsse et al. 2010). Literature reveals that one of the reasons for this could be due to the perception students have that computer programming is a difficult skill to master (Apiola & Tedre 2012, Fesakis & Serafeim 2009). Over the past decade several tools have been developed in an effort to introduce novice programmers to programming in a more interactive and encaging way. These tools include introductory programming languages such as Scratch, Alice and Greenfoot (Utting et al. 2010). The decline in interest in computer programming among students is a reality in South Africa. In an effort to rekindle interest in this field of study the Department of Basic Education in South Africa introduced the Scratch programming language as teaching tool (DBE 2011). The Scratch programming language was developed by MIT as a tool to teach basic programming principles to novice programmers in a visual and interactive way (Resnick et al. 2009, Fesakis & Serafeim 2009). Positive feedback has been received from students, teachers and lecturers from different academic institutions all over the world who used Scratch in their programming courses (Franklin et al. 2011, Malan & Leitner 2007). They found it to be a useful tool since it succeeds in acting as an interactive and easy‐to‐use introductory programming language. The goal of this paper is to reflect on South African school teachers’ perception of the introduction of Scratch as a teaching tool.

2. Literature review 2.1 The demand for computer programming skills We live in a digital world where computer technology has progressed in leaps and bounds to such an extent that it affects our lives in almost every possible way (Ajwa 2007). As technology progresses there is a growing demand for computer scientists. The importance of computer science as part of education is demonstrated by the following two remarks:

To function in society in the 21st century, it is essential for the average citizen to understand at least the principles of computer science.” (Tucker et al. 2003)

"My thesis is that 21st century parents should teach their kids three languages: English, Mandarin, and coding." (www.forbes.com/sites/jjcolao/2012/06/19/codecademy‐raises‐lO‐million‐to‐conquer‐the‐ world).

425

Malie Zeeman Today’s young people are excellent users of technology. They have the ability to browse the Internet, play online games and use social media. Providing these highly technologically‐oriented young people with programming skills could assist them in becoming creators rather than merely users of technology. It would encourage them to be creative thinkers and problem solvers – something much needed globally (Resnick et al., 2009).

2.2 Programming skills in computer science Attaining problem‐solving and programming skills is one of the core outcomes of computer science courses. These skills are perceived to be difficult to master and could be the reason for the high dropout rates for computer science courses (Robins et al. 2003, Fesakis & Serafeim 2009, Apiola & Tedre 2012). Between 2008 and 2011, a study was conducted on students’ perceptions of the difficulty of IT topics in their IT program at the Tumaini University, Tanzania (Tedre & Kamppuri 2009, Tedre et al. 2011). Table 1 shows a comparison between the results of this study in the years 2008 and 2011. The table lists the averages (on a scale of 1 to 5) of students’ perceptions of the difficulty of IT subjects they enrolled for as part of their computer science course. Table 1: Students’ results in IT subjects in 2008 compared to results obtained in 2011 2008 Application software

Average 2.20

2011 Application software

Average 1.93

Communication skills General IT Operating systems

2.30 2.30 2.35

Communication skills General IT Operating systems

1.65 2.35 2.16

E‐Learning Ethics and law Web design

2.35 2.35 2.40

E‐learning Ethics and law Web design

2.55 2.52 2.02

Computer hardware Networks HCI

2.47 2.55 2.65

Computer hardware Networks HCl

2.83 2.60 2.86

Computer security Databases Studying at university

2.70 2.75 2.75

Computer security Database Studying at university

2.81 2.93 2.66

Basic CS Maths Basic concepts Infrastructure Computer architecture

2.80 2.84 3.25 3.47

Basic CS Maths Basic concepts Infrastructure Computer architecture

2.59 2.60 3.23 2.74

Programming 4.05 Programming 3.70 Scale: (1: Very easy, 2: Easy, 3: Average, 4: Hard, 5: Very hard) Tedre, Apiola and Oroma (2011)

Even though there was a positive change in students’ perceptions of computer programming from 2008 to 2011, students in both years consistently indicated that programming was the most difficult IT topic to master. The high level of cognitive thinking skills required to do computer programming contributes to the fact that students find it a difficult skill to master. For this reason careful thought should be given to the way computer programming is introduced to novice programmers. Support could be supplied in the form of user‐friendly and supportive programming editors (Garner 2003). Furthermore, programming should be fun and should take place in an environment that reduces anxiety (Wang & Zhou 2011).

2.3 Suitable introductory programming language Wisniewski (2012) states that when learning any new skill the best place to start is at a beginner’s level. The cognitive developmental levels of students at high school are not yet at a formal operational level (White & Sivitanides 2002). Therefore, the abilities and needs of these students as novice programmers differ from those of experienced programmers (Garner 2003). Furthermore, the learning environment has changed (Wisniewski 2012), and even though books and manuals still have a place in education, interactive ways of learning should be incorporated in the classroom teaching approach.

426

Malie Zeeman Various learning tools to teach simple programming skills have been developed over the years. Some of the earlier developments include Logo and Karel the Robot (Malan & Leitner 2007). More recently‐developed tools include Alice, Scratch, Greenfoot and LEGOs with NXT Mindstorm software (Utting et al. 2010). Scratch has been investigated as a possible teaching tool for computer programming at school level by a number of institutions. Lecturers from the University of California in Santa Barbara organised a summer camp which offered computer science activities to a select group of middle school students from two target audiences; females and people of Latino origin (Franklin et al. 2010). Attendees had to design and code an animated game or story using Scratch as programming tool. The goal was to trigger their interest in computer science. Participants were asked at several stages during the camp what their favourite activities were. Programming in Scratch was in all instances the most popular activity. Malan and Leitner (2007) reported positively on the use of Scratch as part of an introductory computer science course at Harvard and state that the performance of students has improved, while the number of students who drop out of the course decreased dramatically. Wisniewski (2012) reported that Scratch is regarded as the most popular youth‐oriented programming language due to the fact that it is free of syntax issues, which are often the source of frustration. Yet basic programming principles such as conditions, loops and parameters are still introduced effectively.

2.4 The development of Scratch The Scratch programming language was developed by MIT and launched in 2007 (Resnick et al. 2009). The developers used the basic requirements that Papert, the developer of Logo, regarded as important for an introductory programming language. Papert stated that an introductory programming language should be easy to use (have a “low floor”), allow programmers to be creative and develop more complex programs over time (have a “high ceiling”), and allow programmers to design many different types of projects (have “wide walls”). Scratch meets all of these important requirements. Due to the fact that the Scratch developers worked closely with Lego Mindstorm and other robotics kits, many characteristics of Legos have been incorporated into the language (Utting et al. 2010). The “programming blocks” in Scratch represent Lego building blocks and have been designed to slot into each other like the pieces of a puzzle. The “blocks‐of‐code” concept was created to simplify the programming “tools” and to encourage a “try and see what happens”‐approach. This encourages programmers to be creative and problems requiring logical thinking skills in a playful way. However, it is still important to ensure that learning takes place in class (Utting et al. 2010).

2.5 Computer programming in education in South Africa 2.5.1 ICT as part of the school system in South Africa In South Africa all students are required to complete seven years of compulsory primary schooling (Grades 1– 7), with no schooling in ICT (Information Communication Technology). The education of students continues with a further five years of secondary schooling (Grades 8–12). During this period school subjects are reduced from eleven in grade 8 and 9 (none of which includes any schooling in ICT) to seven subjects in grade 10 to 12. Four of the seven subjects in grade 10 to 12 are compulsory subjects, while the remaining three are choice subjects. Information Technology (IT) and Computer Application Technology (CAT) are among the choice subjects. The IT subject is computer‐science oriented and focuses on computer programming, while CAT focuses on the use of software applications such as word processors and spread sheets. During the final year of schooling students write the National Senior Certificate examination in the seven subjects they have been enrolled for in grades 10–12 (Galpin & Sanders 2007). Table 2: The number of grade 12 students who wrote the National Senior Certificate examination in IT in South Africa between 2008 and 2011 Year 2008

#Learners 6787

2009

6246

‐541

2010

4884

‐1362

2011

4313

‐571

427

Increase/Decrease

Malie Zeeman Table 3: The number of schools in South Africa that offered IT as a subject in the years 2008 to 2011 Year

#Schools

2008

439

Increase/Decrease

2009

421

‐14

2010

381

‐44

2011

353

‐28

In a report that was compiled by the South African Department of Basic Education, known as the Birchwood Declaration (2007), IT was identified as a scarce skill, along with mathematics and science. Although the purpose of the declaration was to focus on encouraging interest among students in these fields of study, the figures above (Table 2 and Table 3) reveal a growing lack of interest among students in studying computer science at school level. 2.5.2 The learning experience in computer science classes IT students in South Africa do programming in either the Java or Delphi programming language at school. From 2012 onwards, the curriculum specifies that students must do Scratch programming during their grade‐10 year and may then do programming in a high level programming language during grades 11 and 12. The famous Hello World program is generally the first program a beginner programmer writes. Figures 1, 2 and 3 below illustrate their first encounter with coding in the different integrated development environments (IDEs) – Delphi, Java and Scratch while doing the Hello World program.

Figure 1: Example of the Delphi IDE

Figure 2: The JGrasp IDE – one of the IDEs used for Java programming

428

Malie Zeeman Scratch offers a graphical user interface and prewritten structures of code that can be used to manipulate objects to perform tasks in a visual way on the screen.

Figure 3: The Scratch IDE

3. The research strategy A mixed‐method research strategy was followed for this study. Individual interviews were held with four teachers. Two of the interviewees are female and are referred to as respondents A and B, and the other two interviewees are male and are referred to as respondents C and D. The respondents were experienced computer programming teachers who work at school level. Respondents A and D had more than 20‐years teaching experience in computer programming while respondents B and C each had 10 and 15 years of experience respectively. Prior to the interviews, three of the respondents had used Scratch for a two‐month period to teach basic computer programming skills to grade 10 high school students. Respondent D was more familiar with Scratch than the other three respondents. The interviewees were asked questions on their teaching strategy, how well their students interacted with Scratch, the assessment techniques they applied and whether they thought Scratch contributes to the development of problem solving and programming skills. Following the interviews, a survey was compiled based on the information obtained from the interviews. A sample of 56 (N=56) teachers were asked to participate in the survey. The sample consisted of computer programming teachers who were involved in the implementation of Scratch as an introductory programming language for six months at their schools. Of the total sample of teachers, only 47 teachers completed the questionnaires, which equates to a response rate of 83.9%. Some of the questionnaires were completed by subject advisors who act in an advisory capacity at schools. Since the aim of the research is to reflect on the practical implementation of Scratch in class, the questionnaires completed by subject advisors were not used. A final total of 41 questionnaires (n=41) were used to compile the results for this phase of the study.

4. Results and discussion The qualitative data that was collected during the interviews will be discussed together with data obtained from the quantitative data that was collected from the questionnaires.

4.1 Results obtained from interviews 4.1.1 Ease of use The respondents all agreed that students find the Scratch integrated developed environment (IDE) easy to understand. The responses from the interviewees included the following:

429

Malie Zeeman Participant A: “The layout of the screen is well organised and the instructions are clear. They figured out how to program in Scratch almost on their own.“ Participant C: “Students are familiar with graphical user environments such as Scratch. I think they are more comfortable with the Scratch IDE than me at this stage!” Participant D: “Within the first two days my students could help themselves in Scratch.” These responses confirmed what the literature revealed about the Scratch IDE in that it is the most user‐ friendly teaching tool among the available teaching tools for novice programmers (Malan & Leitner 2007, Resnick et al. 2009, Utting et al. 2010, Wang & Zhou 2011). 4.1.2 Teaching strategies Respondent A had no prior knowledge or experience in Scratch programming and therefore she allowed students to explore the new programming language on their own. Students were required to do some assignments from a textbook within a scheduled period of time. Discussions among learners were encouraged, but respondent A herself did not get involved in the class activities and only assessed the completed Scratch assignments. The same teaching strategy was followed by respondent B and C although they were more involved in discussions in class than respondent A. Respondent D did have some experience in using Scratch. He is therefore more comfortable with Scratch and played a leading role in class by participating in discussions with the students about the requirements of a specific assignment beforehand. Possible solutions were discussed before students were given the opportunity to test these solutions in Scratch. For some assignments students had to provide their own solutions in the form of a written algorithm before they were allowed to test them in Scratch. 4.1.3 Assessment strategy The respondents all applied the same assessment strategy and used assignments as informal assessment tools and a scheduled practical test as a form of formal assessment. The level of complexity of the formal assessment task appeared to be a problem. The respondents were all unsure of the standard of the task they had set. They were all surprised by how well the students performed in their first practical test and the assignments. Respondents C and D expressed concern about the fact that the performance of the students could decline as the tasks become more complex. Respondent C found that there was a significant difference in the ability to complete assignments successfully among the students in class. Some students could not complete assignments within the allocated time while others completed the same assignment in less than half of the scheduled time. 4.1.4 Usefulness of Scratch The question was asked whether the Scratch adds value to the process of attaining computer programming skills in the classroom. Respondent A stated clearly that she regards Scratch as a total waste of time. “I feel we are wasting time playing around with Scratch while the students could have started with some Delphi programming!” In contrast, respondents B and C had a “wait and see” attitude. Responded C expressed the concern that some of the students who do well in Scratch programming may fall behind when they have to do some “actual programming” in another programming environment, such as Delphi or Java. He argued that students solve problems to a large extend on a trial‐and‐error basis in Scratch and that this technique will not hold when more complex problems have to be solved. These remarks confirm similar concerns raised by other researchers (Resnick et al. 2009). This concern was also noted by the participants who completed the questionnaire. Respondent D was extremely positive about Scratch and said, “My students can solve problems more effectively this year than the students from previous years who did not do Scratch.” He was excited about the enthusiasm among students in comparison to the lack of interest among his students from previous years who did no Scratch programming. In his opinion the value of Scratch lies in the atmosphere of excitement it generates among students and how motivated students are to do computer programming. “They literally cannot wait to come to class!”

430

Malie Zeeman 4.1.5 The attitude of teachers towards Scratch Teachers’ attitudes towards Scratch were investigated in terms of how well they knew Scratch before they had to use the tool, how confident they were in teaching Scratch and how positive they were about the Scratch programming language as a teaching tool. Respondent D was the only one who showed a definite positive attitude. The lack of experience in Scratch programming seemed to have an impact on the attitude of respondents A, B and C towards using it as a teaching tool. Respondent A felt incompetent and unsure about how to teach Scratch and was extremely negative about it as a teaching tool. Even though respondents B and C were also not familiar with Scratch, they had a less negative attitude and saw more potential of using it as a teaching tool than respondent A. This phenomenon will be investigated in future research.

4.2 Results of the quantitative research Data were captured from the questionnaires that were completed by a group of IT teachers after using Scratch as a teaching tool for a period of six months. The graph in Figure 4 was compiled based on the number of students that were enrolled for IT in grade 10 to 12 at the teachers’ schools.

Figure 4: The average number of computer science students per school per grade The graph shows an alarming trend among students to drop out of IT before their final year of schooling – a dropout rate of 50% from Grade 10 to 12. In the section provided for comments on the questionnaire, many teachers were of the opinion that Scratch could cause the future dropout rate to decrease due to the high level of interest among students in programming and their level of motivation as a result of the introduction of Scratch in class. 4.2.1 Factors that influence the attitude of students towards IT Teachers were asked to indicate on a scale of 1 to 5 how students interact with and experience Scratch in class (1 = bad and 5 = good). One of the most encouraging results is the high percentage (more than 80%) of the teachers who noticed the creativity students showed when they did their Scratch assignments. Creativity is one of the important skills to have in order to be successful at solving problems ‐ a key aspect in computer programming (Apiola & Tedre 2012). Another positive aspect is the relaxed atmosphere and interactivity that seems to be present among students in class. High levels of anxiety are one of the aspects that prevent effective learning from taking place. Additionally, anxiety can prevent beginner programmers from trying to master programming skills (Koorsse et al. 2010, Apiola & Tedre 2012). From these results it is clear that Scratch has a positive impact on the computer programming learning environment. Teachers expressed concerns about the drag‐and‐drop of instructions instead of the typing out of instructions. Their concerns about this aspect contradicts what was found in previous studies which show that the drag‐ and‐drop feature is one of the reasons why Scratch is such a successful introductory programming language (Malan & Leitner 2007, Resnick et al. 2009, Utting et al. 2010, Wang & Zhou 2011). Students can focus on

431

Malie Zeeman finding a solution to a problem rather than learning the syntax of the programming language which could cause them to lose sight of the problem solving aspect. The trial‐and‐error technique applied when solving problems as a matter of concern is reflected in the literature (Resnick et al. 2009). The fact that teachers already noticed within a period of six months that this is a potential problem should encourage the Department of Education to emphasize the correct teaching strategies when using Scratch in class. Time management is a matter of concern as well. Subject advisors should take note of this problem and supply guidelines for proper time management. Specific objectives should be reached with the completion of each Scratch task.

Figure 5: The perception of teachers of the attitude of students towards Scratch

Figure 6: The teachers’ concerns about Scratch as part of the IT curriculum All teachers in this study expressed concerns about different aspects of assessment. This should be noted and addressed by subject advisors during training sessions. Another concern that was raised included the fact that students explore Scratch at such a pace that teachers cannot keep up. This should, however, rather be seen as a positive aspect. Previously, the syntax of the programming languages prevented students from being creative and able to explore the programming environment. Now, with Scratch, students feel more confident and have the opportunity to explore and share their knowledge with fellow students in class.

432

Malie Zeeman 4.2.2 Teachers’ attitudes towards the Scratch teaching tool

Figure 7: The teachers’ attitudes towards Scratch in class

5. Conclusion Many of the positive aspects mentioned in studies conducted in other countries on using Scratch as an introductory programming language were confirm by data obtained from teachers using Scratch for the same purpose in South Africa. Some of the concerns that were raised by the participants (teachers) in this study, such as the trial‐and‐error method of solving problems, were also raised in other studies on this topic (Resnick et al. 2009). However some aspects that were raised as concerns in this study were experienced as positive aspects in previous studies. This included the rapid progress of students while exploring Scratch and the sense that students’ knowledge of Scratch exceeded that of the teacher. It is clear from this study that some teachers find it difficult to accept the fact that their students may excel beyond the boundaries set by assignments or the scope of the curriculum. In the dynamic world of computer science teachers cannot claim to know all the facts. Allowing students to explore and share their knowledge is necessary and could result in a positive experience. Guidance on the role of subject advisors is required in this respect. This study also revealed that teaching strategies, the attitude of teachers and the successful implementation of a teaching tool such as Scratch could be influenced by the level of prior knowledge and experience in using the teaching tool. It is therefore important to supply proper training to ensure a specific level of confidence among teachers in the use of a teaching tool in class, before requiring that they use the tool. It is encouraging that students seem to embrace Scratch as a programming language. Some important aspects that encourage learning are present with the use of the tool such as a high level of creativity, less anxiety and higher levels of communication regarding work among students in class. The aspects were all observed and it could therefore be concluded that the use of Scratch as part of the computer science curriculum seems to be a step in the right direction. Further studies should be done on the important role that teachers play in the implementation Scratch.

References Ajwa, I., (2007) “Preparing Future Secondary Computer Science Educators”, American Secondary Education, Vol 35, No.3. Apiola, M. and Tedre, M. (2012) “New perspectives on the pedagogy of programming in a developing country context”, Computer Science Education, Vol 22, No 3, pp 285‐313.

Department of Basic Education, Republic of South Africa (DBE), (2007) Birchwood Declaration for Tertiary Level ICT Skills Development, http://www.cs.ru.ac.za/ictskills/Declaration%20ICT‐Skills%202007.pdf Department of Basic Education, Republic of South Africa (DBE). (2011) Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) Information Technology.

433

Malie Zeeman Fesakis, G. and Serafeim, K. (2009) “Influence of the Familiarization with “Scratch” on Future Teachers’ Opinions and Attitudes about Programming and ICT in Education” ITiCSE’09, July 6–9, Paris, France. pp 258 – 262. Franklin, D., Conrad, P., Aldana, G., Hough, S. (2011) “Animal Tlatoque: Attracting Middle School Students to Computing through Culturally‐Relevant Themes” SIGCSE’11, March 9–12, Dallas, Texas, USA. pp 453‐458.

Galpin, VC. and Sanders, ID. (2007) “Perceptions of Computer Science at a South African university” Computers & Education, Vol 49, pp 1330–1356. Garner S. (2003) “Learning Resources and Tools to Aid Novices Learn Programming” Informing Science InSITE ‐ “Where Parallels Intersect” June, pp 213‐222. Koorsse, M., Cilliers, CB. and Calitz, AP., (2010) Motivation and Learning Preferences of Information Technology Learners in South African Secondary Schools, SAICSIT ’10, October 11–13, Bela Bela, South Africa. pp 144 – 152. Malan, DJ., and Leitner, HH. (2007) “Scratch for Budding Computer Scientists” SIGCSE’07, March 7–10, Covington, Kentucky, USA. NCS., (2012) “National Curriculum Statement – Curriculum and Assessment Policy”, [online], http://www.education.gov.za/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=kCW0mdKsF8U%3d&tabid=247&mid=595 Resnick, M., Maloney, J., Monroy‐Hernández, A., Rusk N., Eastmond, E., Brennan, K., Millner, A., Rosenbaum, E., Silver, J., Silverman, B., and Kafai, Y. (2009) “Scratch: Programming for All” Communications of the ACM, Vol 52, No. 11, pp 60 – 67. Robins, A., Rountree, J., and Rountree, N. (2003) “Learning and teaching programming: A review and discussion” Computer Science Education, Vol 13, pp 137–172. Tedre, M., Apiola, M., & Oroma, J. (2011) ”Developing IT education in Tanzania: Empowering students” Proceedings of the FIE’11 Frontiers in Education Conference, 12–15 October Rapid City, SD. Tedre, M., & Kamppuri, M. (2009) “Students’ perspectives on challenges of IT education in rural Tanzania” Proceedings of ISTAfrica Conference, 6–8 May Kampala, Uganda. Tucker, A., Deek, F., Jones, J., McCowan, D., Stephenson, C. and Verno, A. (2003). “A model curriculum for K‐12 computer science: Final report of the ACM K‐12 task force curriculum committee” Association for Computing Machinery, New York: Computer Science Teachers Association. Utting, I., Cooper, S., Kōlling, M., Maloney, J. and Resnick, M. (2010) “Alice, greenfoot and scratch – A discussion” ACM Trans. Computer Education, Vol 10, No. 4, Article 17, 11 pages. DOI = 10.1145/1868358.1868364. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1868358.1868364. Wang X. and Zhou Z.0 (2011) “The research of situational teaching mode of programming in high school with Scratch”, 978‐ 1‐4244‐8625‐0/11, ©2011 IEEE, pp 488‐491. White, GL., Sivitanides MP., (2002) “A Theory of the Relationships between Cognitive Requirements of Computer Programming Languages and Programmers’ Cognitive Characteristics” Journal of Information Systems Education, Vol 13, No. 1, pp 59‐66. Wisniewski J., “Parlez‐Vous Code?” (2012) ONLine, [online], www.onlinemag.net, Nov/Dec, NOV I DEC, pp 57‐60.

434

PhD Research Papers

435

436

Perspectives on the Integration of Facebook Into Higher Education Lillian Buus Department of Communication and Psychology, Faculty of Humanities, Aalborg University, Denmark lillian@its.aau.dk Abstract: This paper introduces findings in my PhD research, entitled “Learning Potentials Integrating Social Media or Web 2.0 in a Problem‐Based Learning Approach.” I have followed three teachers who have begun integrating Web 2.0 activities into their teaching. The main focus in this paper is one of these cases, where the teacher presents “unlimited supervision” using Facebook as a tool to support the initiated activity of online supervision unlimited. There have so far been two iterations in this case, and in this paper I will try to both illustrate how the case has progressed and give a view of my preliminary findings. I would like to discuss how social media like Facebook could be integrated into teaching approaches; this integration could be discussed in terms of whether or not it is beneficial for educational collaboration and sharing perspectives within a problem‐based learning approach. Keywords: social media, Facebook, teaching, learning activities, problem‐based learning, communities of practice

1. Introduction My point of departure for this research is an interest in how social media or Web 2.0 can be integrated into teaching and learning to enhance students’ learning experiences. Furthermore, I find that the problem‐based learning (PBL) model used at Aalborg University (AAU) (Kolmos et al. 2004; Kolmos & Graaff 2003) can be underpinned by these kinds of technologies and activities. The PBL model used at AAU is in general organized around approximately 50% course work and 50% project work. The project work is organized into groups of two to six students, who collaborate on writing their semester project. Often the project is based on real‐life problems and collaboration with external companies or institutions. The students work closely together for an extended period of time. Within this time period, they need to define their problem, review data, research, negotiate, and collaborate to end up with a group‐ based project report. My research takes as a starting point this pedagogical approach, and combines it with wondering whether Web 2.0 or social media could underpin this kind of pedagogical approach. From a learning design workshop based on a collaborative E‐learning design (CoED) method, further described by Georgsen and Nyvang (2007) and Buus (2012), three cases emerged. These are the basic foundation for my further research, which is based on an action research approach. My focus in this paper is on preliminary findings from one of the cases based on a learning activity integrating Facebook. I have been following this activity in two iterations during autumn class sessions; the last iteration took place in 2012. The case actually consists of two activities in parallel, but my main focus is on the one the teacher initiated around unlimited supervision. This paper describes the methodology and the preliminary findings for that case.

2. Web 2.0 or social media as technology or activity? Since 2005, when the term Web 2.0 first arose from the technical vocabulary, defined by O’Reilly (2005), different approaches have been taken to determine what this kind of technology is, and how to integrate it and its applications together with information and communications technology (ICT) in general in educational settings (Dohn 2010; Pelgrum 2001). The use of Web 2.0 technologies is already common among young people (students); at the same time, Web 2.0 technologies are important from a learning theoretical perspective (Crook & Harrison 2008). According to Crook & Harrison (2008), qualities such as participation, production, communication (dialogue), and collaboration make Web 2.0 technologies ideal for actively engaging learners, both individually and collaboratively. Furthermore, as Dohn (2009) also notes, the user‐centered focus of Web 2.0 activities enhances users’ ability to create and maintain connections between formal and informal learning arenas. This is in line with ideas put forth by O’Reilly (2005) and O’Reilly and Battelle (2009). Campión et al. (2012) identify Web 2.0 as “a set of tools, resources and channels conceived with the aim of enriching interactivity in the online communication process, basically as refers to content creation and social participation.”

437

Lillian Buus Looking at these different definitions on how to look at Web 2.0 or social media, I find a need to claim—based on earlier research articles within this field—that there is a distinction between Web 2.0 technologies or resources (e.g., blogs, tweets, and podcasts) and Web 2.0 activities or practices (e.g., blogging, podcasting, and tweeting). It is also important to state that integrating Web 2.0 technologies into learning practices does not make learning a Web 2.0 activity (Dohn & Johnsen 2009; Glud et al. 2010). Looking further at the research done by Campión et al. (2012), analyzing what kinds of technologies or resources are being used and to what degree the notion of Facebook, together with media like Twitter and LinkedIn, is the basis for social networks and collaboration among users, as well as a system to retrieval data. Common to all of these technologies is the fact that they are based on individual or personal environments as a view into a person’s personal and/or professional life in a social technological environment. I believe it is important to have a focus on learning activities from a teacher’s perspective and, further, to have a pedagogical perspective as the starting point for a learning design. Therefore, this is the focus I have tried to keep in my choice of methodology and in my collaboration with the teachers. Facebook plays an important role in students’ everyday personal lives. Lam (2012) examined four benefits related to learning supported by Facebook and students’ motivation to learn: interaction, communication, social relationships, and participation. These four benefits supplement the AAU PBL model, as they are also part of the identification of the AAU PBL model (Kolmos & Graaff 2003; Kolmos et al. 2004; Glud et al. 2010). Some interesting findings in Lam’s (2012) research refer to the teacher’s role. Teachers need to be active and help catalyze student learning, and they must also act as knowledge guides for students. In order to have the benefits related to interaction, teachers should be sufficiently active and interactive in order to show their participation and engrossment in the online environment (Lam 2012). The integration of Facebook into educational settings is further looked into by Kabilan et al. (2010), who found both positive and negative impacts of integrating Facebook into higher education (HE). The positive impacts embrace learner motivation and engagement, which are also mentioned by Lam (2012). Furthermore, they strengthen students’ social networking practices and post‐hoc evaluation of learning experiences and events. On the other hand, the negative effects include time issues (wasting or overspending), and might encourage negative attitudes. Many educational institutions have joined in on the effort to reach out to students using social networking platforms such as Facebook, thinking of platforms like Facebook as marketing tools and thus as platforms for advertising educational programs (Kabilan et al. 2010). Furthermore, Facebook is also used by educational institutions to capture students even before they arrive (e.g., in relation to international students).

3. Methodological approach One of my objectives is based on how Web 2.0 implicates the learning process, focusing on the teacher’s use of Web 2.0 applications. My research objectives indicate my interest in investigating how teachers can and do integrate Web 2.0 or social media into their teaching, and in being able to follow the evolution of such activity. Fully aware of the potential pros and cons when dealing with an action research project, I still initiated one with teachers from AAU’s Faculty of Social Sciences. My action research project followed the interactive research approach (Svensson 2002, Svensson & Nielsen 2006), seeing me as the researcher and the teachers as practitioners collaborating in a joint learning process to initiate interventions in practice. In taking this approach, one would say that the collaborative process identifies the practitioners and researcher as co‐researchers who seek to integrate their diverse theoretical and practical knowledge into the development of viable new means of enacting practice, and of learning from each other and about each other’s practices during the process. It is also important to be aware of the benefits this approach provides. Practitioners have insider knowledge of their practice, which allows them to understand and evaluate the scope and implications of suggestions for interventions (Dohn 2008). Conversely, the researcher has knowledge of relevant theories and different technologies, of other cases described in the literature, and of various research methods. My approach has been that I had the possibility of looking at teaching practice from a less‐involved perspective. I had the opportunity to ask the teacher about their learning design from other angles, so as to enable alternative thinking. Taken together, these aspects allowed me to see “blind spots” in

438

Lillian Buus the practice, and to support the teacher in developing new ideas for their practice. I find that practitioners and researchers working closely together can supplement, challenge, and evaluate each other’s understanding of practice and of ways of transforming it, eventually developing shared perceptions of it. In my PhD research project, I as the researcher have theoretical knowledge about learning, PBL and Web 2.0 pedagogics, and qualitative research methods. The teachers, being university teachers at AAU, have content knowledge within the courses they teach, teaching experience from similar courses with similar groups of students, and some theoretical knowledge of pedagogy and PBL. Of course, in conjunction herewith, they also had research knowledge within their own field. Both the practitioners and I have some common ground at the outset, which highly advanced our collaboration and understanding of each other’s perspectives. My deciding to take this research approach and designing it as action research was based on a notion about this approach that has several advantages. These advantages include those given below.

It is possible to look at “not‐yet‐existing” things; i.e., the researcher is not limited to investigating existing practices because of their focus on intervening in and qualifying practice.

It is possible to initiate activities that, to the best of the co‐researchers’ combined knowledge, should support the development of successful practices—i.e., the “best by hypothesis”—and then investigate to what extent this actually happens and which factors either enabled or hindered success.

The practitioners’ insider knowledge allows for a more nuanced evaluation of the success of the intervention than will in general be possible for an outsider (Dohn 2008).

The researcher, on the other hand, keeps some distance from the practitioners’ practice, which allows the researcher to conduct a less‐involved, less‐biased evaluation than will in general be possible for an insider.

Between them, and through ongoing dialogue, practitioners and researchers may reach a much fuller yet not‐too‐involved understanding of the practice; the initiated interventions, their results, and their consequences; and possible future improvements.

Doing interactive research makes the teachers and I succeed in becoming co‐researchers in a joint learning process. The more committed I as researcher might become to the project and to the practice itself, the less neutral I will probably be in my evaluation, and the more blind spots I will develop. In this paper, I focus on only one of the interventions I do in my research, though it has two iterations, both involving a researcher and a practitioner. During the planning phase for the course I followed in the first iteration involving two cases (Cases A and B), I had many discussions with the teacher prior to the course, but only participated in the first and last lecture. I did not attend any of the many face‐to‐face learning activities in between these lectures. I partook in the initiation of the Web 2.0‐mediated activities in both cases, but not in their progression. Drawing on the previously mentioned action research plan, I did not become a co‐ participant in this course, nor did the teacher become a co‐researcher as such. This had partly to do with the degree of technological and pedagogical facilitation this particular teacher wanted, and partly with the concrete activities integrated into the course.

3.1 Conducting a collaborative design workshop My action research project was initiated by a kickoff workshop in the spring of 2011, followed by the development of three cases with three different activities and courses. The workshop utilized the CoED method (Georgsen & Nyvang 2007), which modified to also contain Web 2.0‐mediated approaches (Buus 2012; Buus et al. 2010). The CoED method is a methodological framework for practitioners in more general terms—not only teachers (Buus et al. 2010). The method scaffolding teachers introduce networked (social and collaborative) or blended learning into their teaching practice. It concentrates on user participation and collaboration. Furthermore, it draws on knowledge and theoretical concepts within the following research fields: design for learning, systems development within ICT, and collaborative learning and the facilitation of creative processes. The workshop format is low‐tech, using cards, pens, and paper in the support of practitioners developing their own course/learning designs. The emphasis is to bring focus and structure into the early stages of a learning design process. The method first strives to inspire by making theoretical and practical presentations. This is followed by making the practitioners, in groups, negotiate on and finally choose three core pedagogical values. Finally, it

439

Lillian Buus aims to support the groups in developing a course/learning design that addresses their core pedagogical values. This design must integrate activities, resources (tools), and infrastructure. One of the advantages of this method is the ability to develop design specifications and/or early prototypes in just a few hours of work, while also allowing the practitioners to be concrete about design. The method has been tried out in a number of different settings (Georgsen & Nyvang 2008; Buus et al. 2010). Taken by itself, the CoED method does not test the design and sustainability of the results gained in the workshop, nor does it facilitate the implementation process (Buus et al. 2010). From other projects using the method, it has become increasingly clear that the method needs to be supplemented on these points for it to really support the development of tangible course/learning designs, and also as a method to actually deliver design ideas between key persons in a design process. Thus, quite generally, an extension of the CoED method was called for, and I provided such an extension as an integral part of my PhD research and action research project (see Buus 2012). In my PhD data collection, I aimed at co‐researching interventions in practice, together with teachers, by also supporting the process beyond the initializing workshop. The teachers were therefore scaffolded in further developing their activities, ideas, and designs initialized in the CoED workshop and transforming them into actual teaching and learning practices from the perspectives of Web 2.0 activities supported by Web 2.0 or social media technologies.

Figure 1: The steps of my action research project My action research covers data based on participatory observation during the CoED workshop, observations lectures, interviews with teachers, and questionnaires answered by groups of students. The case I focus on in this paper is based on observation of virtual interaction during both iterations, but for the second iteration, I attended all lectures so as to follow the classroom interactions. Furthermore, I had informal conversations with the teacher prior to his course, as a form of pedagogical and technological sparring. In addition, I further conducted individual interviews with the teacher in order to get more formal documentation of his perspective on initiating Web 2.0‐mediated educational activities. Finally, online surveys were directed to students in both iterations.

4. The case: Introducing an activity using Facebook One of the cases emerged from the workshop deals on the meta‐level, with collaborative processes and knowledge sharing in smaller and larger groups. My research and empirical data collection in this case is based on two iterations; one in the autumn of 2011 and the other in the autumn of 2012.

440

Lillian Buus The activity initiated in this case is based on students being offered unlimited supervision for a small group project within a course. This small group project refers to the group work, taking place at AAU, using the Aalborg PBL model based on problem‐ and project‐oriented group work (Kolmos et al. 2004). The course is based on a five‐week intense period culminating with the project. During the five weeks, students are introduced to a Danish company; they collaborate making and conducting a questionnaire, collect and analyze data, and give feedback to the company. They further need to learn the Danish educational culture at AAU with a group exam and a PBL approach. The students are international graduate students coming from different educational backgrounds and cultures not necessarily used to the AAU PBL model based on collaboration, group work, and project work (Kolmos et al. 2004; Kolmos & Graaff 2003). There are Danish students among the international students; they play an important role in the integration of the international students into AAU pedagogy and the translation of the material used in the course, which is primarily written in Danish. The intention of the Web 2.0‐mediated learning activity initiated by the teacher was to give the students the opportunity to have unlimited supervision, provided that the supervision took place in writing a blog/forum/group feature; supervision normally takes place in face‐to‐face sessions with a set amount of time for supervision. Furthermore, the teacher intended the students to experience the presence of the supervisor to a higher degree than in traditional supervision settings. Therefore, the teacher would like to offer an alternative where supervision takes place using group features. The teacher’s intention with the activity was to make students aware that collaborating makes one learn more than one can learn alone, and also makes one contribute to delivering a better product. (“Product” here refers to the group project). This was also intended to support sharing and collaboration during course and lectures, underpinning an educational community of practice among students (Wenger 1998). There have been two iterations of this learning activity initiated by the teacher; the first iteration had 76 students, two‐thirds of which were international students from 20 different countries. The students got to choose either a Moodle forum or a closed Facebook group. Facebook was chosen by a majority of the students. A Facebook group was established during the kickoff lecture, and then, after the collection of the questionnaire data, the students had 10 days of unlimited supervision before handing in their group projects and attending the final exam. There were two prerequisites for getting supervision from the teacher: 1) the students could only get supervision in the Facebook group, and 2) at least one fellow student should try to answer or give good ideas before the supervisor gave his feedback. In their finalized projects, the students were required to indicate how many contributions they had made to the Facebook group, specified as new postings and comments to others. Their degree of participation did not count toward their final grade, though, since there was no foundation for this in the study regulations. The second iteration had 90 students, two‐thirds of which were international students from 20 different countries, primarily eastern countries like Rumania and Poland; the rest were Danish. The terms for the activity had changed in that the students also had the chance to choose their platform, but the already‐ established Facebook group was integrated into this learning activity at the request of the teacher. As an improvement, the teacher started the supervision process during the kickoff lecture, so as to be established with each group. My role as a researcher in this second iteration also changed, as I observed all lectures together with the virtual environment (the Facebook group). I did so with the intention of seeing how much time the students spent on Facebook (or other things) during lectures. The setup also changed, as other teachers in the teacher team also took a part in the discussions on Facebook, in order to answer methodological and theoretical questions. The director of the company involved was also invited to participate in the Facebook group. This gave the students the opportunity to ask questions and to follow up on ideas or designs. As a follow‐up to both iterations, a small questionnaire was given to the students. Further I had an interview with the teacher.

441

Lillian Buus

5. Preliminary findings in my research Looking into the data collected so far and my preliminary analysis, I see some differences in the use of social media in this case from the students’ point of view. Both iterations used Facebook as the media supporting the activity, and there were no doubts from the students’ perspective that Facebook was the media to choose. On the other hand, looking at the activity level in the Facebook group, I see a huge difference in the commitment to sharing and collaborating between the two iterations. In the first, the students did not have any kind of dialogue related to methodological or theoretical questions, nor perspectives. Instead, their dialogue was primarily based on practicalities like “How many pages should we deliver?” or “When and where do we hand in the project, and how many copies do we need?” One of the factors that was set up in the first iteration was determining the students’ input by making them provide link to videos or texts that they found. What did not happen was that they did not comment on or reflect upon why a link was important in a shared setting or for why they thought that said link might be useful in the project and group work. One could claim that the intention with this activity did not really work, as there was no collaboration between the project groups (among the students). Furthermore, one could argue that the students got the supervision they needed; in the questionnaires, the students mostly expressed a feeling that the supervisor was easy to get in touch with, and the exam results showed no decreases in students’ marks. The second iteration differed very much from the first in both the level of interaction and student engagement. Their sharing and community engagement was shown even before the activity was launched, as the students had already gathered into a Facebook group before their first meeting; it is interesting to see the students’ reactions their use of their own personal education space being integrated into the activity. I have some data on this right now from the questionnaire, and the students have different opinions on this. Some find it useful and easy to integrate into the Facebook group, while others find a change in the interaction going from informal to more formal. This gives a broad picture of how the students’ online personalities differ. My impression in looking at the data stream from Facebook is that the dialogue changes little, even with the involvement of the teacher in the Facebook group. Another observation of the differences between the two iterations is the impact of the activity initiated, combined with the prior activity in the second iteration. The teacher changed the start time of the activity, meaning that students in the first iteration had only 10 days of supervision, but students in the second iteration had supervision for all five weeks. From the point of view of a researcher, I find the interaction in the second iteration better in that there was more methodological and theoretical dialogue, but again, some students express a wish to have such discussions initiated by the teacher. From the students came another perspective on the use of Facebook: they liked how quick and easy it was to get answers to questions and be in contact with the rest of the group, including the teacher. However, several students pointed to the fact that they felt a need for face‐to‐face supervision as a supplement to the Facebook group. Furthermore, they also expressed a need for the teacher to verify the answers from their fellow students as being either right or wrong. There seems to be a need for the teacher’s role to be that of an expert, not just a facilitator. The main benefit that has come out of this activity is the students’ enhanced notion of the importance of collaboration and social networking. This was not true in the first iteration, as the Facebook group did not continue after the course, even though one student suggested changing the name and continuing to post in the group. The students in the second iteration, however, still have a strong educational dialogue, but they are also influenced by the more personal but still study‐related (more social study‐related) dialogue that continues to take place. Comparing the two groups’ marks also helps give us an idea of the benefits of active collaboration and dialogue.

6. Discussion and conclusion In this paper, I have tried to illustrate how social media like Facebook could be integrated into the initiation of a Web 2.0‐mediated learning activity. The paper describes one method of integrating Facebook into one’s teaching, and further explains how the process and the activity are initiated; different initiatives and perspectives are described (Kabilan et al. 2010; Meishar‐Tal et al. 2012; Lam 2012) in the literature about the

442

Lillian Buus use of Facebook. Comparing these perspectives with the findings I have made so far in my research, I would argue that the need for the teacher being facilitative and engaged online is important for good interaction and collaboration on Facebook. I believe that Facebook can be beneficial for the educational collaboration and sharing perspective within any PBL approach. From the perspective of a PBL approach, I find many similarities in the way Facebook seems able to support this learning approach, which are also identified in my preliminary findings. That being said, there are still some issues that have been identified in the use of collaborative tools in an ordinary learning management system; e.g., will the teacher still have an important role as both the facilitator and coordinator (expert) within the discipline taught? The teacher needs to initiate activities and dialogue to make interactions and participation take place. Some students will have the ability and strength to initiate this, even though this responsibility still falls on the teacher, who defines both the activity and the way in which it is defined.

References Buus, L. et al. (2010) “Developing a Design Methodology for Web 2.0 Mediated Learning,” In L. Dirckinck‐Holmfeld et al., eds., Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning, Aalborg, Denmark, pp 952–960. Buus, L. (2012) “Scaffolding Teachers Integrate Social Media Into a Problem‐Based Learning Approach?” [online], Electronic Journal of e‐Learning, Vol 10, No. 1 2012, pp 13–22, http://www.ejel.org/issue/download.html?idArticle=175 Campión, R.S., Nalda, F.N., & Rivilla, A.M. (2012) “Web 2.0 and Higher Education: Its Educational Use in the University Environment,” [online], European Journal of Open, Distance and E‐Learning, Vol 2, http://www.eurodl.org/index.php?p=archives&year=2012&halfyear=2&article=535 Crook, C. and Harrison, C. (2008) “Web 2.0 Technologies and Learning at Key Stages 3 and 4: Summary Report.” BECTA. Dohn, N. (2009) “Web 2.0: Inherent Tensions and Evident Challenges for Education,” [online], International Journal of Computer‐Supported Collaborative Learning, Vol 4, No. 3, pp 343–363, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11412‐009‐9066‐8 Dohn, N.B. (2010) “Teaching with Wikis and Blogs: Potentials and Pitfalls,” Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning 2010, Aalborg, Denmark, pp 142–150. Dohn, N.B. and Johnsen, L. (2009) “E‐læring på web 2.0,” Samfundslitteratur, Frederiksberg C. Georgsen, M. and Nyvang, T. (2007) Collaborative e‐Learning Design Method, E‐Learning Lab, Aalborg. Glud, L.N. et al. (2010) “Contributing to a Learning Methodology for Web 2.0 Learning: Identifying Central Tensions in Educational Use of Web 2.0 Technologies,” In L. Dirckinck‐Holmfeld et al., eds., Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning, Aalborg, Denmark, pp 934–942, http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fss/organisations/netlc/past/nlc2010/abstracts/PDFs/N%C3%B8rgaard%20Glud.pdf Kabilan, M.K., Ahmad, N., and Abidin, M.J.Z. (2010) “Facebook: An Online Environment for Learning of English in Institutions of Higher Education?” [online], The Internet and Higher Education, Vol 13, No. 4, pp 179–187, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1096751610000588 Kolmos, A., Fink, F.K., and Krogh, L. (2004) The Aalborg PBL Model: Progress, Diversity and Challenges, Aalborg University Press, Aalborg. Kolmos, A. and Graaff, E.D. (2003) “Characteristics of Problem‐Based Learning,” [online], International Journal of Engineering Education, Vol 19, No. 5, pp 657–662, http://www.ijee.dit.ie/latestissues/Vol19‐5/IJEE1450.pdf Lam, L. (2012) “An Innovative Research on the Usage of Facebook in the Higher Education Context of Hong Kong,” [online], Electronic Journal of e‐Learning, Vol 10, No. 4, pp 378–386, http://www.ejel.org/issue/download.html?idArticle=217 Meishar‐Tal, H., Kurtz, G., and Pieterse, E. (2012) “Facebook Groups as LMS: A Case Study,” [online], The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, Vol 13, No. 4, pp 33–48, http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/download/1294/2337 O’Reilly, T. (2005) “What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software,” [online], O’Reilly Media, http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what‐is‐web‐20.html O’Reilly, T. and Battelle, J. (2009) “Web Squared: Web 2.0 Five Years On,” [online], Web 2.0 Summit 2009, http://www.web2summit.com/web2009/public/schedule/detail/10194 Pelgrum, W. (2001) “Obstacles to the Integration of ICT in Education: Results from a Worldwide Educational Assessment,” [online], Computers & Education, Vol 37, No. 2, pp.163–178, http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0360131501000458 Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity, Cambridge University Press, New York.

443

Factors Influencing the Acceptance of Web 2.0 Technologies in the Learning Environment of Nigeria: A Conceptual Framework Razep Echeng, Abel Usoro and Grzegorz Majewski University of the West of Scotland, Paisley, UK razep.echeng@uws.ac.uk abel.usoro@uws.ac.uk grzegorz.majewski@uws.ac.uk

Abstract: Few empirical studies in literature have investigated the acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies in learning. These studies do not contain an explanatory or predictive model of acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies in learning hence the need for this study that investigates factors that influence the acceptance of technologies in learning with particular focus on Nigeria. This paper presents a conceptual framework that could be used to explain and predict the acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies in learning in this country. The model constructs (motivation, perceived usefulness, social factors, perceived ease of use, performance expectancy, and facilitating condition) were derived from three theories of acceptance of technology: Technology acceptance model (TAM), Unified theory of the use and acceptance of technology (UTAUT) and Theory of reasoned action (TRA) with addition of one new construct ‐ prior knowledge. The derived constructs were considered relevant to learning environment. Our use of more sophisticated combined model overcomes deficiencies in one single model. This paper lays the groundwork for future empirical work that could be carried out in both developed and developing economies. Keywords: Nigeria, Web 2.0, technology acceptance, higher institutions, conceptual model of acceptance

1. Introduction Web 2.0 introduces an innovative way of learning (Redecker et al. 2009) therefore encouraging higher institutions to adopt it. This adoption is more prominent in developed countries (Redecker, et al., 2009; Ala‐ Mutka et al. 2009a; Ala‐Mutka 2010) than in developing ones like Nigeria (Aborisade 2009; Olasina 2011; Anunobi and Ogbonna 2012). This does not mean that the need is not great in Nigeria. One indication of this need is the large class sizes and insufficient facilities like computers, books and other equipment for facilitating learning in higher institutions (Saint et al. 2003; Olasina 2011). Thus, lecturer‐student and student‐student communication, interaction and collaboration are ineffective. The distributed, personalised, participatory and collaborative learning platform provided by Web 2.0 technologies can potentially address these difficulties.

1.1 Gap in knowledge/ research questions Review of literature revealed very few empirical studies on the acceptance and use of Web 2.0 in the learning environment of Nigeria (e.g. Aborisade 2009; Olasina 2011; Echeng 2011; Anunobi and Ogbonna 2012). There is a gap in knowledge of an explanatory or predictive model of acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies in learning. Thus, the guiding question of this research is: What factors influence the acceptance of Web 2.0 tools in learning in Nigerian higher education?

1.2 Method To address the research question the study

performed a critical literature review of Web 2.0 technologies (e.g. blogs, wikis, podcast, and twitter) in learning; their acceptance in Nigeria; and widely used technology acceptance models; and

developed a theoretical framework, based on the review, that proposed hypothetical relationships between constructs to explain and predict acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies for learning in Nigeria.

444

Razep Echeng, Abel Usoro and Grzegorz Majewski

2. Literature review 2.1 Potentials of Web 2.0 technologies in learning McLaughlin and Lee (2008) viewed Web 2.0 broadly as a second generation of the internet with more personalized communicative capability. It emphasizes active participation, connectivity, collaboration and sharing of knowledge and ideas among users. Web 2.0 is also referred to as the “Read‐Write Web” (Price 2006; Richardson 2006) as it goes beyond content provision and viewing but also enables users to actively contribute to the content. Web 2.0 applications and tools include but are not limited to web blogs, wikis, Really Simple Syndication (RSS), podcasts, social networking sites, tag‐based folksonomies and peer‐to‐peer (P2P) media sharing utilities (McLoughlin and Lee 2008). These applications, sites and tools, are receiving intense and growing interest across all sectors of education and industry (Allen 2004; Price 2006) and research findings bring to light considerable potential for meeting the needs of today’s diverse students. Web 2.0 technologies allow learners to explore materials at their own pace; encourage interaction with various people across the world; enhancing collaboration with peers, researchers, teachers and experts (Boulos et al. 2006; Redecker et al. 2009). Online learning adoption broadens access to education promoting lifelong learning and reaching a wider audience thereby removing class barriers (Redecker et al. 2009; Ala‐ Mutka 2010). Web 2.0 social computing (e.g. with wikis) in education enriches teaching and learning in a constructive and collaborative way allowing for dynamic learning and opening up innovative opportunities to acquire key competence for improving quality and efficiency (McLaughlin and Lee 2008; Redecker et al. 2009; Chiu et al. 2009). The increasing demand for new educational approaches and pedagogies as well as advances in technology has encouraged the increased deployment of technology in learning environments (Heather et al. 2009). Emphasis is placed on enhanced acquisition of knowledge, participation, knowledge creation and development of skills and resources necessary to engage in social and technological change (Franklin and Harmelen 2007). Irrespective of this emphasis, acceptance of technology has long been a challenging issue in information systems research (Swanson 1994; Ajjan and Hartshorne 2008; Redecker et al. 2009). Understanding why people accept or reject technology is crucial because it serves as a guide for investors, manufacturers, institutions and managers to direct their investment in the area of providing structural facilities to promote the acceptance and use of Web 2.0 technologies in learning and teaching (cf. Ajjan and Hartshorne 2008). Web 2.0 technologies have been researched in the learning context for the past years. Recent research in this area has experimented with the actual setting up and running of Web 2.0 technologies for learning (e.g. Parker and Chao 2007; McLoughlin and Lee 2008; Mayer 2010; Xie and Shama 2010) but not much of such research has been done in Nigeria (Olasina 2011; Echeng 2011; Anunobi and Ogbonna 2012). Such empirical studies are also still needed in Nigeria, as suggested by Aborisade (2009), Olasina (2011), Anunobi and Ogbonna (2012), in order to assess students’ attitudes, perception, behavioural intentions and their social and psychological challenges in using these technologies for learning. Web 2.0 technologies will provide informal avenues for students to learn from each other and from their lecturers. The knowledge acquisition and active participation in learning supported by these technologies would enable the students to apply the three metaphors of learning: acquisition, participation and creation (Engeström 2001; Paavola et al. 2004). Resent research by Olasina (2011) investigated the use of Web 2.0 tools and social networking sites in Nigeria and his report shows that most employees use social networking sites mostly for entertainment and only 25% of them use these tools for acquiring skills and knowledge or for projects collaboration. Olasina (2011, p 28) concluded by suggesting that management should find a way of assisting students to use these technologies for learning with the use of their phones instead of depending on insufficient computer facilities provided by the government. Echeng (2011) investigated the use of Web 2.0 and the availability of its supporting facilities – mainly computers and wireless networks ‐ in some Nigerian university campuses and reported that the facilities in the campuses were not sufficiently available. To address the problem of insufficient computers for internet access, the strategy (according to ICT directors, network administrators and directors of academic planning

445

Razep Echeng, Abel Usoro and Grzegorz Majewski interviewed at three higher institutions) is to encourage students to use their smart phones while at the same time endeavouring to improve internet access on campuses through hotspots. Moreover, implementation of such innovative strategies as using Web 2.0 technologies in learning would be influenced by organizational structure and information systems design (Swansea 1994). The information system departments of many Nigerian universities are still in the infant stage, and their engagement of students in online learning activities very rarely exists. In addition, there are the complexities of numerous cultures, languages, beliefs, ethnic groups and low economic level but this should not stop the institutions from identifying the student’s needs and trying to meet them (Heather et al. 2009). Another recent research in Nigeria (Anunobi and Ogbona 2012) investigated awareness and use of Web 2.0 tools among librarians and found that the awareness for learning to be low; social networking sites were mainly used for non‐academic socialization due to five factors: personality characteristics (individual lifestyles), lack of interest, competence (27.8%), lack of internet facilities (41%) and lack of encouragement (motivation). These findings supported the research of Echeng (2011) regarding facilities available for students and competence or lack of it with Web 2.0 technologies for learning. However, the pilot study in Nigeria, and literature that informed this research revealed other important constructs ( see table 1) not included in Anunobi and Ogbona (2012) and these additional factors can be incorporated into the model proposed in this paper.

2.2 The theoretical perspectives Various theories have been developed to predict acceptance of technology. The theory of reasoned action (TRA) (Ajzen and Fishbein 1975), which originated from social psychology, was the first theory to be used to predict acceptance of technology. The TRA explains the relationships between beliefs, attitudes, norms, intentions, and behavior. This theory argues that individual’s behavior in acceptance or rejection of technology is determined by the person’s intention to perform this behavior and the intention is influenced jointly by the individual's attitude and subjective norm. However it is noted that motivation is a very useful factor in learning and influences attitude Eccles and Wigfield (2002), hence it is a useful variable in this research for predicting acceptance and use of Web 2.0 technology for learning. Other theories, such as the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) Davis et al. (1989), Unified Theory of Acceptance and use of Technology (UTAUT) Venkatesh et al. (2003), were extended from TRA for the use of predicting acceptance of technology because it was found to be insufficient to predict non volitional behviour (Ajzen 1980). The theory of planned behaviour (TPB) (Ajzen and Fishbein 1980) was extended to allow for behaviours not under complete volitional control and this also provides the reason why intensions do not always predict behaviours. Armitage and Connor (2001) studied 185 research studies that used TPB until 1997 and found that subjective norm was a weak variable in predicting behavioural intention. The report of Armitage and Connor (2007) also showed that TPB accounted for 27% and 39% of variance in behaviour and intention, respectively, but attitude and subjective norm accounted for a significant variance in individual desire than intention or self‐ prediction. Hence belief (Percieived usefulness and perceived ease of use) and behavioural intention form part of the framework developed to predict acceptance and use of Web 2.0 technologies in learning. TAM is one of the theories that have been tested and used by a lot of researchers to predict acceptance (e.g. Straub et al. 1997; Davis et al. 1989; Hofstede 2001; Venkatesh et al. 2003; McCoy and Galletta 2007; Teo, Su Luan and Sing, 2008; Mazman Usluel 2010). TAM which was extended from TRA divided belief into two: perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use as major factors that influence behavioural intention and actual use. However, TAM was found to be culture dependent (McCoy and Galletta 2007; Hofstede 2001) after testing TAM in 20 countries and found that it was not valid across cultures due to culture and organizational difference. Straub et al.(1997) and Teo, Su Luan and Sing (2008) also reported that TAM was not valid in Japan, Malaysia and Singapore. So far, TAM has not been tested in Nigeria's learning environment but various researches have extended TAM to include constructs for different purposes in learning environment. Examples of such research with additional construct suited for Nigerian learning environment is by Fetscherin and Lattermann (2008) because motivation was introduced into TAM model but none of these researches have considered the students’ prior knowledge as a factor that may influence acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies in learning environment. This study borrows and adapts all the variables of TAM. 3

446

Razep Echeng, Abel Usoro and Grzegorz Majewski

Figure 1: The theory of reasoned action (TRA) (Ajzen and Fishbein 1975)

Figure 2: Technology acceptance model (TAM) The Unified Theory of Use and Acceptance of Technology (UTAUT) was developed using a combination of eight models namely: theory of reasoned action, theory of planned behaviour, motivational model, social cognitive theory, model of PC utilization, innovation diffusion theory (IDT), and technology acceptance model (TAM and TAM2). The UTAUT posits that performance expectancy, social factor, facilitating condition and self‐efficacy influence behavioural intention and actual use and these influencing factors are moderated by age, gender, voluntariness and experience. UTAUT attempts to explain the relationships between behavioural intention on the one hand and acceptance and use of technology on the other. But it may be better to test behavioural intention separately from use because if a learner has not used these technologies before, the experience would not be there; so one cannot measure experience. Rather if we are predicting behavioural intention, knowledge of the existence of these technologies and their use for other purposes can be measured and tested to see whether these can influence acceptance for learning in the future. Realizing the shortfall of using a single acceptance model like UTAUT alone, researchers have decided to combine the models. For instance, Terzis and Economides (2011) proposed a model for computer‐based assessment acceptance model (CBAAM) using previous acceptance models ‐ Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Usage of Technology (UTAUT) ‐ and reported that this model was a better predictor of acceptance for computer‐based assessment. However, the UTAUT has been validated in business and educational contexts (e.g. Venkatesh et al. 2003; Oshiyanki, Cairns, and Thimbleby 2007) but has not been tested in Nigeria were the pilot study of this research was carried out. Nigeria is unique from other environments especially because of its variety of ethnic groups, beliefs, religions and cultures which may influence the outcome of any study. This study borrows and adapts some variables (performance expectancy, social factor, facilitating condition, behavioural intention and actual use) from UTAUT.

447

Razep Echeng, Abel Usoro and Grzegorz Majewski

Figure 3: The unified theory of use and acceptance of technology (UTAUT) In addition to the literature, a pilot study which involved interviewing students, lecturers and ICT directors in higher institutions in Nigeria revealed other factors which include emotional support, encouragement, motivation to use, awareness seminars and trainings, communication and interaction between students and lecturers (high power distance) cost of internet broadband, cost of power supply on campus, signal availability, and knowledge of the usefulness of this technologies. These variables have been integrated into the seven constructs in the conceptual model (see Table 1). This research tests selected components of TAM, TRA and UTAUT with an additional variable: prior knowledge.

3. Conceptual model The constructs of this research were developed, on the basis of relevance, from existing technology acceptance models, existing research and a pilot study as already explained and shown in Table 1. However, voluntariness was dropped because the pilot study revealed that students would not on their volition use social network for learning; they would only use it if it directly contributes to their performance and also there is overwhelming and compelling reason to do so. The table also shows the overlapping of theories, i.e. the appearance of constructs in more than one theory. The rest of this section will present hypotheses that connect the constructs into a research model. Perceived Usefulness (PU) Perceived usefulness is the belief that the use of technology will improve and progress the work or learning activity of an individual or an organization. Research by Davis et al. (1989) and Venkatesh et al. (2003) found that perceived usefulness affects technology acceptance. This research wants to examine the effect of perceived usefulness with regards to Web 2.0 technologies for learning in Nigerian universities with the hypothesis: H I: There is a positive relationship between perceived usefulness and behavioural intention for acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies in learning in Nigerian universities. Social Factors (SF) A social factor in this context comes from the impact of social presence on individual behaviour. This could be communication and interaction with students and lecturers which may give interpersonal agreements that affect behaviour of individuals in a group (Guerin 1993; Taylor and Todd 1995; Aiello and Douthitt 2001; Venkatesh 2003). This factor was included in Davis et al.’s (1989) as external factor, which they argued may 5

448

Razep Echeng, Abel Usoro and Grzegorz Majewski influence technology acceptance and also included in UTAUT. This research seeks to validate this argument when considering Web 2.0 acceptance for learning in Nigerian higher education. Therefore: H2: Social factors have a positive relationship with behavioural intention for acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies for learning in Nigerian universities. Table 1: Constructs and their sources Constructs Perceived usefulness

UTAUT

Prior knowledge 1 (PK) Social factors (SF)

Experience Social influence

Performance expectancy (PE) Actual use

Performance expectancy Use behaviour

Motivation (M)

Perceived ease of use Perceived ease of (PEoU) use Facilitating condition (FC) Facilitating condition

Behavioural intention (BI)

Behavioural intention

TAM Perceived usefulness External factors

TRA

Pilot study Usefulness

Prior knowledge Social interaction, communication and collaborative environment Performance expectancy

Actual use

Actual use Motivatio n

Usage Motivation to use, emotional support, encouragement, interest and power Ease of use

Computers, internet facilities, awareness seminars and trainings, signal availability and cost Behavioural Behaviour Future use intention al intention

Prior Knowledge (PK) Prior knowledge can be described as knowledge of a set of circumstances sufficient to make actions based on those circumstances. Prior knowledge here can be explained to be a combination of learner’s knowledge and experience of something and it is often helpful and very useful in learning environment Kujawa and Huske 1995; Mitchell et at. 2005) this knowledge or experience could positively influence acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies for learning, hence the following hypotheses: H3: Prior knowledge has a positive relationship with behavioural intention for acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies for learning in Nigerian universities. Facilitating condition (FC) The access of internet facilities, the availability of good internet signals and cost of broadband can be regarded as facilitating conditions for the use Web 2.0 technologies for learning. Therefore, they may influence the use of Web 2.0 technologies in the Nigerian higher education. Thus, it can be hypothesized that: H4: There is positive relationship between facilitating condition and behavioural intention for acceptance of Web 2.0 tools in learning in Nigeria universities. Perceived Ease of use (PeoU) Perceived ease of use is the degree to which an individual believes that the use of technology will be without much effort, but will help to achieve much in a short time (Davies et al. 1989; Mitchell et at. 2005). This has been used by Davies et al. (1989) to predict acceptance of technology, and this research suggests that perceived ease of use should predict acceptance of Web 2.0, hence the hypothesis: H5: There is positive relationship between perceived ease of use and behavioural intention for acceptance of Web 2.0 in learning in Nigerian universities. Performance Expectancy (PE) 1

A new variable that came from pilot study.

449

Razep Echeng, Abel Usoro and Grzegorz Majewski Performance expectancy is the degree to which an individual or group of people expect to be proficient in their work or education when they are using technology. Venkatesh et al.’s (2003) research found this variable as promoting technology acceptance. To investigate this finding in the case of Web 2.0 in learning in Nigerian higher education, we used the hypothesis: H6: There is a positive relationship between performance expectancy and behavioural intention for acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies in learning in Nigerian universities. Motivation (M) Motivation in this context involves emotional support, internal or external support that stirs up a learner or gives the desire to act. Motivation can facilitate or hinder change in a learner (Ajzen and Fishbein 1975 ;Eccles and Wigfield 2002; Fetscherin and Lattermann 2008). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation develops personal behaviour which can in turn affect evaluation of choice, goals and achievements. Thus, motivation to use Web 2.0 tools in learning is likely to influence attitude of the learners, and it should influence behavioural intention. H7: There is a positive relationship between Motivation and Acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies in learning in Nigerian universities. Behavioural intention (BI) Ajzen and Fishbein (1975) argued that a person’s performance of a specific behavior is determined by their behavioral intention. Behavioural intention to use Web 2.0 technology can influence actual use. Thus the hypothesis: H8: Behavioural intention has a positive relationship with actual use of Web 2.0 technologies for learning in Nigerian universities. Motivation Perceived usefulness H1 Social factor

Prior knowledge

Facilitating condition

Behavioural intention

Actual use

Perceived ease of use Performance expectancy

Figure 4: Conceptual model The hypotheses developed in this section are reflected in the research model (see Figure 4).

4. Conclusion This paper presents a conceptual framework that combines selected constructs from three models (Technology acceptance model (TAM), unified theory of the use and acceptance of technology (UTAUT) and theory of reasoned action (TRA)) and a new construct – prior knowledge ‐ to explain and predict acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies in learning in Nigerian higher education. This research spans from a critical review of literature which revealed gap in knowledge explanatory or predictive factors (and the nature of their influence) associated with the acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies in learning in higher education of Nigeria. The framework developed consists of variables based on their usefulness in learning environment and because none of these existing models had all of the essential constructs that could predict acceptance in any learning environment. The implication for research is to use this framework to investigate students’ and lecturers’ views on the acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies in learning environment in Nigerian higher education.

References Aborisade, P. (2009) Investigating a Nigerian XXL‐Cohort Wiki‐Learning Experience: Observation, Feedback and Reflection, Electronic Journal of e‐Learning, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp 191‐202.

450

Razep Echeng, Abel Usoro and Grzegorz Majewski Aiello, J. and Douthitt, E. (2001) Social Facilitation from Triplett to Electronic Performance Monitoring Group Dynamics: Theory, Research and Practice, Vol. 5, No 3, pp 163‐180. Ajjan, H. and Hartshorne, R. (2008) Investigating Faculty Decisions to Adopt Web 2.0 Technologies: Theory and Empirical tests, The Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 11, No.2, pp 71‐80. Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1975) Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: an Introduction to Theory and research, from http://worldcat.org/isbn/0201020890 [accessed 12th December 2012]. Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1980) Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behaviour Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice‐ hall. Ala‐Mutka, K. (2009) Review of Learning in ICT‐enabled Networks and Communities. JRC Scientific and Technical Report, from: http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/pub.cfm?id=2721. Ala‐Mutka, K. (2010) Learning in Online Networks and Communities. JRC Scientific and Technical Report, from http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/pub.cfm?id=3059 [accessed 14th June 2012]. Ala‐Mutka, K., Bacigalupo, S. Kluzer, C. Pascu, Y. Punie and C. Redecker (2009a). Learning 2.0: The Impact of Web2.0 Innovation on Education and Training in Europe. JRC Scientific and Technical Report, from: http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/pub.cfm?id=2139. Allen, C. (2004) Tracing the evolution of social software, from http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2004/10/tracing_the_evo.html [accessed 14th June 2012]. Anunobi, C. and Ogbonna, A. (2012) Web 2.0 use by librarians in a state in Nigeria. Developing Country Studies, Vol. 2, No.5, pp 56‐66. Armitage, J. and Connor, M. (2007) Efficacy of Theory of Planned Behaviour. British Journal of Social British Journal of Social Psychology (2001), Vol.40, pp 471–499. Boulos, N. Maramba, I. and Wheeler, S. (2006) Wikis, Blogs and Podcasts: a New Generation of Web‐based Tools for Virtual Collaborative Clinical Practice and Education. BMC Medical Education, 6, 41. from: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472‐6920/6/41 [accessed 14 Feb 2013] Chiu, H., Wen, S., and Sheng, C. (2009). Apply Web 2.0 tools to constructive collaboration learning: A case study in MIS course, Fifth International Joint Conference on INC, IMS and IDC. Seoul, South Korea. pp. 1638‐1643. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989) User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, Vol.35, No. 982–1003. Eccles, J. and Wigfield, A (2002) Annual Review in Psychology. 2002. Vol. 53, pp.109–132. Echeng, R. (2011) The use of Web 2.0 in teaching and learning. An Msc Theses submitted to University of the West of Scotland. Engeström, Y. (2001) Learning by expanding: An Activity‐theoretical Approach to Developmental Research. th Helsinki:Orienta‐Konsultit, from http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/Engestrom/expanding/toc.htm [accessed [20 November 20, 2012]. Fetscherin, M. and Lattemann, C (2008) User Acceptance of Virtual worlds. Journal of electronic commerce research, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp 231‐241. Franklin, T. and Harmelen, M. (2007) Web 2.0 for Content for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, London: Joint Information Systems Committee. Guerin, B. (1993) Social Facilitation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University press. Guerin, B. and Innes, J.M. (1982) Social Facilitation and Social monitoring: A new look at Zajonc’s Mere Presence hypothesis. British Journal of Psychology. Vol. 21, pp 7‐18. Heather, F., Ketteridge, S. and Marshall, S. (eds.) (2009) A Handbook for teaching and learning in Higher Education: Enhancing Academic Practice, Routledge. Hofstede, G. (2001) Culture’s Consequences. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. Kujawa, S. and Huske, L. (1995) The Strategic Teaching and Reading Project guidebook .Oak Brook, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. Legris, P Ingham, J. and Collerette P. (2003) Why do People Use Information Technology Acceptance Model, Information & Management, Vol. 40, pp 191‐204. Mazman, S., and Usluel, Y. (2010) Modelling educational usage of Face book. Computers & Education, Vol. 55, pp 444‐453. McCoy, S. Galletta, D. and King, W. (2007) Applying TAM Across Cultures European Journal of Information Systems, Vol.16, pp 81–90. McLoughlin, C. and Lee, M. (2008) Mapping the Digital terrain: new media and social software as catalysts for pedagogical change, Proceedings Ascilite www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/melbourne08/procs/mcloughlin.pdf (accessed November 2012). Mitchell, T. Chen, S and McCredie, R. (2005) Hypermedia learning and prior knowledge: domain expertise vs. system expertise Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol. 21, Issue 1, pp 53‐64. Olasina, G. (2011) The Use of Web 2.0 tools and Social Networking Sites by Librarians, Information Professionals, and Other Professionals in Workplaces in Nigeria. PNLA Quarterly, the official publication of the Pacific Northwest Library Association, Vol. 75 No.3, pp 72‐33. Oshlyansky, L., Cairns, P. and Thimbleby, H. (2007) Validating the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) tool cross culturally. British Computer Society, Vol. 2, proceedings of the 21st BCS HCI Group conference. Paavola, S., Lipponen, L. and Hakkarainen, K. (2004) Models of Innovative Knowledge Communities and Three Metaphors of Learning, Review of Educational Research, vol. 74, No.4, pp 557–576.

451

Razep Echeng, Abel Usoro and Grzegorz Majewski Parker, K. and Chao, J. (2007) Wiki as a Teaching Tool Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, Vol. 3, pp 57‐72. Price, K. (2006) Web 2.0 and education: What it means for us all. Paper presented at the 2006 Australian Computers in Education Conference, 2‐4 October, Cairns, Australia. Redecker, C. (2009) Review of Learning 2.0 Practices: Study on the Impact of Web 2.0 Innovations on Education and Training in Europe, JRC Scientific and Technical Report, EUR 23664 EN, ftp://ftp.jrc.es/pub/EURdoc/JRC49108.pdf. Redecker, C., K. Ala‐Mutka, M. Bacigalupo, A. Ferrari and Y. Punie (2009). Learning 2.0: The Impact of Web 2.0 Innovations on Education and Training in Europe. Final Report. JRC Scientific and Technical Report, EUR 24103 EN: http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/pub.cfm?id=2899. Richardson, W. (2006) Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and other powerful tools for classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Saint, W., Hartnett, T. and Strassner, E (2003) Higher education in Nigeria: A Status Report, Higher education policy, Vol.16, pp 259‐281. Straub, D., Keil, M., and Brenner, W. (1997) Testing the technology acceptance model across cultures: A Three Country Study, Information and Management, Vol. 33, No.1, pp 1‐11. Swanson, E. (1994) Information systems Innovation among Organizations. Management Science, Vol. 40, No.9, pp 1069‐ 1092. Taylor, S and Todd, P. (1995) Understanding Information technology usage: A Test of Competing Models. Information Systems Research, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp 144‐176. Teo, T., Luan, W. and Sing, C. (2008) A Cross‐Cultural Examination of the Intention to Use Technology between Singaporean and Malaysian Pre‐service Teachers: an application of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Educational Technology & Society, Vol.11. No.4, pp 265–280. Terzis, V. Economides, A. (2011) The acceptance and use of computer based assessment, Computers & Education, Vol. 56, pp 1032–1044. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. Davis, G. and Davis, F. (2003) "User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view", MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27(3) pp 425–478. Xie, Y. and Shama, P. (2010) The Effect of Peer‐Interaction Styles in Team Blogging on Students Cognitive Thinking and Blog Participation, Journal of Educational Computing, Vol.42, No.4, pp 459‐479.

452

The Management Practices of ICT Integration in the Curriculum of Primary Schools in Uganda Stephen Kyakulumbye and Isaac Wasswa Katono Uganda Christian University, Uganda kyakusteve@yahoo.com kyakusteve@ucu.ac.ug Abstract: The study investigates how ICT integration in the primary school curriculum is managed in Uganda. School management practices were conceptualized as planning, organization and coordination. The dependent variable is ICT integration. The study is a cross sectional survey using mainly quantitative data. The population comprised teachers and school head teachers in Mukono District in Uganda. Data was collected using self administered questionnaires using a likert scale. The response rate of 94.2% was sufficient to rely on the results of this study. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistical analysis, , correlation analysis (Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient) and multiple regression analysis to establish the causal influence of management practices on ICT integration. The major finding of this study was that planning, coordination and organization significantly impacts ICT integration. A multiple regression analysis revealed that all the management practices had a casual effect on ICT integration. Recommendations are made that the state should formulate and implement policies to schools to regulate ICT implementation and prescribe strategies to influence teachers’ attitude to ICT integration, and offer support to school management to enhance their management practices in order to manage the ICT integration process into the curriculum. In addition, based on the research, we propose that more software and hardware should be made available to schools. Further research may measure the management styles and change management strategies that may be adopted in order to successfully integrate ICT into the primary school curriculum. Such a study may be triangulated with the qualitative views from the respondents. Keywords: ICT integration, school management practices: planning, coordination and organization

1. Background Evoh (2007) espouses that ICT integration in the curriculum enhances access to information about the global markets in this information society among learners. He adds that managing ICT integration into curricula to positively influence teaching and learning has been in a state of evolution over the past 20 years. Driven primarily by the hardware and software evolution, accessibility to computers in educational settings, popular instructional technology trends like e‐learning, and the integration of technology has covered the continuum from instruction on programming skills, self‐directed drill and practice, interactive learning software, online training, testing, instructional delivery and Internet‐based accessibility to information, communication and publication (Dias & Atkinson, 2001). There are efforts to integrate ICT into curricular in secondary and institutions of higher learning, however, integration of ICT in primary schools in Uganda is still low (Adelman & Taylor, 2011). In this respect school management becomes a crucial partner in effecting ICT integration in primary schools. The management of ICT integration falls under curriculum management. Curriculum management refers to decision‐making on the processes of development and planning of the curriculum and materials development. Curriculum management is an ongoing exercise and it is applicable at various levels of the educational hierarchy, yet non‐hierarchical in itself, nonlinear and internally interactive. Effecting curriculum management requires school managers to engage in four operational processes which include needs assessment, planning and development, implementation, and evaluation (ClaroNetwork, 2012). In Ugandan context, ICT integration has been primarily driven by national policies on ICT such as the National Educational Sector ICT Policy (Uganda Ministry of Education and Sports, 2005), and the Communication Act and the draft version of the ICT in Education Policy (Uganda Ministry of Works, Housing and Communications, 2003; ICT draft policy, 2008). The key focus in these policies is that government investments in ICT should not be on the provision of equipment and facilities but on teachers, trainers, lecturers, and the implementation of ICT use in the curriculum used in schools. The policies reiterate the need for ICT literacy and the improvement in ICT use and human resource capacity building linked to ICTs. The Uganda Educational Sector ICT policy underscored the need for investing ICTs from primary to tertiary level. Among the strategies for attaining this objective was to mainstream integration into school curricula as well as other literacy programmes so as to provide for equitable access for pupils and students at all levels of education (Uganda Ministry of Works, Housing and Communications, 2003). At primary school level, the policy

453

Stephen Kyakulumbye and Isaac Wasswa Katono aims at encouraging those schools that have acquired technology to use and integrate it in teaching and learning. This is done either by producing teaching materials or using technology with learners in the learning process. In Uganda, ICT integration in the primary school curriculum is enhanced by computer awareness programmes at teacher training colleges. The programmes enable teachers to get equipped with skills to make use of ICT in primary schools. In the intended study managing ICT in primary school curriculum involves questioning of managerial and instructional practices that school managers use to integrate it in their practice.

1.1 Problem statement The primary school curriculum in Uganda has been undergoing change and reform since 1997. One major reform has been the integration of ICT in the primary school curriculum. Some primary school head teachers are making efforts to integrate ICT in the school curriculum, initiating and leading change processes needed in the local contexts and carrying through the adjustments that are required in compliance with the national education sector ICT policy though coupled with managerial challenges. These challenges are related to lack of ICT management skills and understanding, attitudes, procuring and deployment of resources, and technological know‐how in curriculum management, and monitoring and evaluation of ICT development plans. These challenges affect the ICT reform process in primary schools. Hence, the need for approaches that enable school management functions to effectively integrate technology into classroom instruction to meet the school’s vision and goals in this information age (Kawooya, 2004; Kozma, 2010; Mehlinger, 1996). Therefore, the need to find out how school managers manage ICT integration is a beginning point for effective ICT project implementation.. This study was therefore guided by the following questions:

1.2 Subsidiary questions

What ICT managerial practices do school managers adopt to streamline the integration of ICT in the primary school curriculum?

To what extent do these managerial practices support ICT integration in primary schools?

What is the casual effect of managerial practices of school managers on the integration of ICT in the school curriculum?

2. Review of related literature This section presents literature related to this study pertaining management practices and ICT integration into the school curriculum. It does not only focus at primary schools but also at post primary schools.

2.1 Curriculum management Curriculum management is an important part of school management and is linked to ICT integration in schools because the latter requires curriculum management. Curriculum management is associated with positive effects on student performance (Kanjee & Prinsloo, 2005; Taylor & Prinsloo, 2005). Elmore (1999) argues that direct involvement in curriculum management and instruction by school managers creates an enabling learning environment that improves the quality of teaching and learning with the ultimate purpose of improving students’ outcomes. Further, Louise et al (2006) point out that the school management is crucial in making structural changes to support integration. Firstly, school managers establish and manage a school culture conducive to conversations about the core technology of instruction. In addition, they structure, procure and allocate school resources toward instruction, and build capacities of teachers, both individually and collectively; and provide both summative and formative monitoring of instruction and innovation (Hallinger, 2000). Thus, how the management of curriculum and instruction is undertaken across the school needs to be considered in this study.

2.2 Curriculum management and ICT policy Curriculum management is central in managing and making decisions in schools in the context of the establishment of school policies that fosters quality classroom instruction (Adelman & Taylor, 2000; Galabawa,

454

Stephen Kyakulumbye and Isaac Wasswa Katono & Agu, 2001). School policies help to clearly map and sequence opportunities for the application and development of ICT in schools across the curriculum and to ensure that ICT is integrated in a way consistent with the National ICT policy. The key focus of the school ICT policy approach is an articulation of specific instructional strategies that can support and connect the use of ICT to develop students’ ICT skills for application during learning experiences (Cox, Webb, Abbot, Blakeley, Beauchamp, & Rhodes, 2003). Hence, curriculum management is important because it enhances school management to establish structures and explicitly design criteria and procedures to monitor the instruction, gather and evaluate data to make sound decisions that will help improve pedagogical classroom practices (Cobb & MacClain, 2003; Kozma, & Anderson, 2004). Therefore, monitoring, reviewing and evaluation of the use of ICT within the curriculum, analyzing areas that require further attention, as well as acknowledging areas of success, will enable teachers and children to maximize their use of ICT to support classroom instruction. However, effecting curriculum management requires school managers to engage in four operational processes which include needs assessment, planning and development, implementation, and evaluation (Anderson 2001; Kincaid Tanna & Feldner Lisa, 2002). This study summarizes these processes as planning, organizing and coordination which forms the bases for investigation.

2.3 Planning Planning is one of the key aspects of the curriculum management. When planning for the use of ICT in the classroom, it is important for teachers to identify the role that ICT can play in adding value to teaching and learning across the curriculum (Anderson, 2001). Literature further reveals that schools managers play an increasing role in planning, leading change, providing vision and objectives as well as teacher development initiatives in using ICT to bring about pedagogical changes (Anderson, 2002; Cheng, 2009; Leach, 2005; Yee, 2002). Thus, planning necessitates ensuring that use of ICT is carefully planned so that the exact nature and timing of demands on ICT resources are clearly identified across subject and departments to inform future purchase and allocation of resources as well as ensuring that there is continuous technical support for teachers on use of computer applications in their classrooms (Dede, 1999; Tearl, 2004; Van der Westhuizen, Mosogo, & Van Vuuren, 2004). Hence, integration of ICT in instruction cannot be managed neither can improvement be sustained easily without effective planning. The school management’s mediation as well as the ability of the school managers to provide technical support and coordinate all the planned activities is crucial in managing change (Fullan, 2002; MacDonald, 2006). Therefore, medium‐ and long‐term ICT plans, across all subjects, are crucial for schools to identify clearly how ICT will be used to move teaching and learning forward (Bush, Glover, Bischoff, Moloi, Heystek, & Joubert, 2006).

2.4 Organization Teacher classroom instructional practices involve the use of computers for classroom activities and presentations, for management tasks and to acquire additional subject matter knowledge to enhance students’ learning (Haddad, 2003; Higgins, 2006; Mooij, 2007). The use of computers can help teachers respond with needed changes in curriculum and instruction (Eadie, 2000; Fawcett & Nicolson, 2000; Jonassen, 2000; Soudien, 2001). The changes in instructional practices take into account the use of various computer‐ based tutorials, tools, and e‐content as part of whole class, small group, or individual student activities but the use is often supplemental (Bennett, 1996; Lei & Zhao, 2007; Schiller, 2002). The use of computer‐based tutorials has significant implications for the transformation of management structures and classroom instructional practices. Kosma, (2010) attest that as teachers become constantly engaged in educational experimentation and innovation in collaboration with an extended network of colleagues and experts to produce new knowledge about learning and teaching practices, they become themselves master learners who model the learning process for their students (Bush & Heystek, 2007; MCEETYA, 2005; Phelps, Graham, & Kerr, 2004). Therefore, head teachers should continuously monitor their progress, review the school’s vision and goals, and adjust to new circumstances to create and allow space for teachers and students to experiment and try out the ICT skills learnt (Hay, 2001; Spillane, Halverson & Diamond, 2004; Southworth, 2002).

2.5 Coordination Coordination processes ensure smooth running of ICT integration in classroom instruction across the curriculum and provides for pedagogical, technological and administrative support to teachers, to enhance constant and effective use of computers for classroom‐based students’ learning activities (BECTa, 2002; Rowland &Adams, 2005). ICT co‐coordination in schools whether carried out by head teachers, HODs or

455

Stephen Kyakulumbye and Isaac Wasswa Katono subject teachers, is therefore, very important. Steems and Mooij, (1999) in their studies report that coordination of ICT integration in schools is a widely acknowledged role for teachers because they are the main change agents in the classroom. According to Lee and Dimmock, (1999), coordination of the curriculum management in primary schools takes three themes. The first is the extent to which the curriculum is actually managed, or whether it ‘just happens’ through teachers working interdependently. The second is the degree to which headteachers are involved in the management of curriculum, or whether it is left to HODs and teachers. Thirdly, when headteachers are involved, how they bring their influence to bear impact on learners’ outcomes (Lee & Dimmock, 1999). For the intended study, all the three themes are considered important because the coming together of these parties is integral to the success of ICT integration. Moreover, a blend of curriculum management and classroom instructional strategies necessary for ICT integration and co‐ordination rests largely with a pool of teachers’ involvement to effect a whole school cultural change (Naace, 2002). Blasé & Blasé (1999) also argues that if ICT leadership is dispersed and supported among staff, they will be able to coordinate and apply the school plans consistently in their classrooms as well as play their instructional and technical roles more efficiently (Mosha 2006; Thomson, 2001). Thus, the measure of success of ICT co‐ coordination in schools is largely dependent on the support from school management (Gustafson, 2005; Harris, 2005).

3. Methodology The study employed a survey and quantitative research design in nature. For quantitative findings from the survey, close ended questionnaires were generated. The study was also cross sectional in nature where data was collected one point in time. Quantitative design further provided empirical data to test the hypotheses and provide answers to the research questions.

3.1 Methods of data collection For quantitative data collection, a five point Likert‐scale was used to develop survey questionnaire items. Specifically, the cross‐sectional survey questionnaire was administered to school managers investigating about the various ICT managerial practices using scale labels “strongly agree,” “agree,” ‘’Not sure’’ “disagree,” and “strongly disagree with 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 respectively.” Respondents were asked to tick the number on a scale indicating the extent to which they agree or disagree with their school exhibiting a particular managerial practice (descriptor).

3.2 Sample Research site of the schools was purposively selected on the basis of data‐richness, that is, the availability of computers and ICT integration in the curriculum. This sample was stratified on the basis of the four major learning areas in the curriculum: English, Social studies, Mathematics, and Science of which ICT is integrated (Fowler, 2002).This sample was drawn from private and government aided schools in Uganda. The total sample size was 110 was drawn from 160 teachers using Krejcie, Robert V., Morgan, Daryle W. (1970) statistical table for sample size selection (Appendix 1).

3.3 Data analysis The quantitative data was entered into SPSS (Version 16.0). Data analysis was mainly at three levels: First level was Univariate presenting frequencies with data in frequency distribution tables and descriptive statistics mainly mean as a measure of central tendency and standard deviation as a measure of variability; the second level was Multivariate level mainly measures of relationships‐Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation Coefficient and the third level was Multivariate level mainly Multiple Regression Analysis.

3.4 Validity and reliability Survey questionnaires were first tested for practicability to check for validity using the Content Validity Index. The tool was given to independent experts who crossed out the invalid questions. The CVI generated was 0.89 which is above the presupposed 0.7 by many researchers. Reliability was ensured by piloting ten copies, by hand delivery, and with ten teachers out of the research site. After data collection, SPSS was used to compute Cronbach Alpha which generated a value above 0.8 for all the study variables implying that the tool was reliable and could be used for data collection since Amin (2005) recommends a Cronbach alpha of 0.6.

456

Stephen Kyakulumbye and Isaac Wasswa Katono

4. Findings: Background variables The study targeted 110 teachers from the selected schools. Out of that number, 30.8% were from private schools, 69.2% were from Government Aided Schools. This therefore implies that majority of the respondents were from government aided schools which are perceived to be model schools in effecting curriculum implementation. Pertaining grades, the study revealed that 15.4% of the respondents were teachers of Grade 1, 15.4% grade 2, 10.3% grade 3, 17.9% grade 4, 23.1% grade 5, 7.7% grade 6 and 10.3% grade 7. This implies that most of the respondents were teachers of grade 5. Pertaining a subject a teacher was teaching, 25.6% were teachers of English, 30.8% teachers of Maths, 20.5% integrated Science and 23.1% Social Studies. This therefore implies that all disciplines taught in the Primary School level could necessitate integration with ICT.

5. Empirical findings 5.1 Descriptive statistics‐ The table 1 below shows the composite percentages, means and standard deviation of the responses Table 1: The composite percentages, means and standard deviation of the responses Variable

Percentage (agreement) 77% 55% 62% 32%

Planning Coordination Organization ICT Integration

Aggregated Mean 2.92 2.84 3.20 1.58

Aggregated standard deviation 0.42 0.53 0.45 0.48

Generally, respondents were in agreement the school managers undertake the practices of planning, organising and coordinating. The aggregated means for planning, coordination and organization are 2.92, 2.84 and 3.20 respectively which are above the perceived mean of 2.5. This implies that respondents were in agreement with the management practices in place. Moreover the standard deviations generated do not show very wide divergences in respondents’ views towards the same. Pertaining ICT integration into the curriculum, 32% of the respondents were in agreement leaving the rest (68%) in disagreement. The mean of 1.58 indicates a disagreement compared to a delimitation of agreement and disagreement of 2.5. This implies that ICT integration in the curriculum does not exist yet among the studied schools.

5.2 Relational statistics: The study further established whether there was a relationship between the school management practices and ICT integration based on Pearson’s correlation coefficient model computed following the formula;

r xy =

n(∑ xy ) − (∑ x )(∑ y )

(

)

{(

)

{ n∑ x − (∑ x ) } n ∑ y 2 − (∑ y ) 2

Where n ‐ is the number of paired observations, practices and ICT integration, practices,

∑y

∑x

}

∑ xy is the sum of the gross product of school management

is the sum of all the squared values of school management

is the sum of all the squared values of ICT integration,

management practices squared and

(∑ y )

(∑ x ) is the sum of school 2

is the sum of ICT integration and below is the results:

Table 2 shows that organization and ICT integration generated a sig value of 0.001 and r‐value of 0.511** which is statistically significant at 95% level of significance; planning and ICT integration generated sig. value of 0.000 and r‐value of 0.687** also revealing strong relationship; coordination and ICT integration generated sig. value of 0.000 and r‐value of 0.734** also revealing statistically significant relationship. This implies that all the three school management practices (planning, coordination and organization) strongly relate to ICT integration into the primary school curriculum.

457

Stephen Kyakulumbye and Isaac Wasswa Katono Table 2: Correlation results

ORGANIZATION

COORDINATION

INTERGRATION

COORDINATION

INTERGRATION

.419

.332

.511**

Sig. (2‐tailed)

.009

.041

.001

110

Pearson Correlation

PLANNING

.523

.687**

.009

.001

.000

110

Pearson Correlation

.419

Sig. (2‐tailed) N

Pearson Correlation

.332

.523

.734**

Sig. (2‐tailed)

.041

.001

.000

110

Pearson Correlation

.511

.687

.734

Sig. (2‐tailed)

.001

.000

110

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2‐tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2‐tailed).

5.3 Multiple regression results On realising that a strong relationship between the school management practices and ICT integration existed, this prompted the researchers to undertake multiple regression analysis to establish the causal effect based on the multiple regression model of Y = β 0 + β1 + β2 + β 3 3 + ......β n + ε where Y ‐is the 1 2 n

dependent variable, X 1− n ‐ are the independent variables,

β 0 is the constant, β1− n ‐ are the regression

coefficients and below are the results: Table 3: Model summary b

Model

R a

.832

R Square

Adjusted R Square

Std. Error of the Estimate

Durbin‐Watson

.693

.666

.28212

1.506

a. Predictors: (Constant), COORDINATION, ORGANIZATION, PLANNING b. Dependent Variable: INTERGRATION

Table 4: ANOVA b

Model 1

Sum of Squares

Mean Square

Sig.

Regression

6.098

2.033

25.540

.000a

Residual

2.706

.080

Total

8.804

a. Predictors: (Constant), COORDINATION, ORGANIZATION, PLANNING

b. Dependant variable: ICT INTEGRATION

The model summary table 3 reveals r‐squared of 0.693 and the adjusted r‐squared of 0.666. This coefficient of determination implies that the success of ICT integration in the curriculum of primary schools in Uganda is explained be the school management practices of planning, coordination and organization by 66.6%. The remaining 33.4% is explained by other factors not covered in this study and could be studied in another study. In the ANOVA table 4, a sig. value of 0.000 implies that the joint probabilities of the studied school management practices are statistically significant to ICT integration in the curriculum. To establish which of the school management practices is over and above to predict ICT integration into the curriculum, table 5 reveals that coordination yielded the highest beta value of 0.484, followed by planning with beta value of 0.344 and last is organization with beta value of 0.206. This implies that coordination is the most crucial school

458

Stephen Kyakulumbye and Isaac Wasswa Katono management practice when integrating ICT in the primary curriculum, followed by planning and lastly organization. Table 5: Coefficients Unstandardized Coefficients Model 1

Std. Error

Standardized Coefficients Beta

Sig.

(Constant)

‐.027

.386

‐.069

.945

ORGANIZATION

.222

.114

.206

1.943

.060

PLANNING

.411

.140

.344

2.941

.006

COORDINATION

.432

.100

.484

4.305

.000

a. Dependent Variable: ICT INTERGRATION

6. Discussion of results One key research question was to find out the school managerial practices school managers use to direct the integration of ICT in the primary school curriculum. The results revealed planning, organization and coordination as critical management practices. The results agree with (Anderson, 2001) who emphasises that when planning for the use of ICT in the classroom, it is important for teachers to identify the role that ICT can play in adding value to teaching and learning across the curriculum. The results of this study are further in agreement with Kosma, (2010) who attests that as teachers become constantly engaged in educational experimentation and innovation in collaboration with an extended network of colleagues and experts to produce new knowledge about learning and teaching practices, they become themselves master learners who model the learning process for their students and therefore become well organized. Meanwhile (BECTa, 2002; Rowland &Adams, 2005) postulate that ICT co‐coordination in schools whether carried out by head teachers, HODs or subject teachers is very important. The study further agrees with Lee & Dimmock, (1999), who suggest that coordination of the curriculum management in primary schools takes three themes. The first is the extent to which the curriculum is actually managed, or whether it ‘just happens’ through teachers working interdependently. The second is the degree to which heateachers are involved in the management of curriculum, or whether it is left to HODs and teachers. Thirdly, when head teachers are involved, how they bring their influence to bear impact on learners’ outcomes (Lee & Dimmock, 1999).

7. Recommendations The following recommendations were made in line with the research questions: government should formulate, disseminate and enforce policies to schools to integrate ICT in the curriculum of schools, address strategies to change users’ negative perception of teachers towards ICT integration and offer support to school management to enhance their management practices in order to manage the ICT integration process into the curriculum. More e‐learning software and hardware should be made available to the various schools. Government should further attract more investors in ICT software and hardware to have ICT further implemented in the schools for effecting e‐learning. A similar study can further be extended in the post primary schools in Uganda.

Appendix 1: Table for determining sample size from a given population N 10 15

S 10 14

N 100 110

S 80 86

N 280 290

S 162 165

N 800 850

S 260 265

N 2800 3000

S 338 341

20 25 30

19 24 28

120 130 140

92 97 103

300 320 340

169 175 181

900 950 1000

269 274 278

3500 4000 4500

246 351 351

35 40 45 50

32 36 40 44

150 160 180 190

108 113 118 123

360 380 400 420

186 181 196 201

1100 1200 1300 1400

285 291 297 302

5000 6000 7000 8000

357 361 364 367

55 60

48 52

200 210

127 132

440 460

205 210

1500 1600

306 310

9000 10000

368 373

459

Stephen Kyakulumbye and Isaac Wasswa Katono N 65

S 56

N 220

S 136

N 480

S 214

N 1700

S 313

N 15000

S 375

70 75 80

59 63 66

230 240 250

140 144 148

500 550 600

217 225 234

1800 1900 2000

317 320 322

20000 30000 40000

377 379 380

85 90 95

70 73 76

260 270 270

152 155 159

650 700 750

242 248 256

2200 2400 2600

327 331 335

50000 75000 100000

381 382 384

Note: “N” is population size “S” is sample size.

References Adelman, H. S. & Taylor, L. (2011). Turning around, transforming, and continuously improving schools: Policy proposals are still based on a two rather than a three component blueprint. International Journal of School Disaffection, 8(1), (Spring). Anderson, L. (2001). The role of the school business manager in technology planning. [Online] Available http://www.netp.com/Sch.Bus.Mgr.html Anderson, R.E. (2002). Guest Editorial: International Studies of Innovative uses of ICT inSchools. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(4), 381‐386. Amin (2005): Essentials of Research Methods. th Babbie, E. (2007). The Practice of Social Research (11 Ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thamson. Bennett, F. (1996). Computers as Tutors: Solving the Crisis in Education. [Online] Available http://www.cris.com/~Faben1/html. Blasé, J.J (1999). The Micro Politics of the School: The Everyday Political Orientation of Teachers Toward Open Principals. Educational Administration Quarterly, 25 (4), 379‐409. Bryman, A. (2006) Mixed Methods: A four‐volume Set. London: Sage. Bush, T., Glover, D., Bischoff, T., Moloi, K., Heystek, J., & Joubert, R. (2006). School Leadership, Management and Governance in South Africa: A systematic Literature Review. Johannesburg: Matthew Goniwe School of Leadership and Governance. Bush, T., & Heystek, J. (2007). School Leadership and Management in South African Schools: Principals' Perceptions. International Studies in Educational Administration, Cheng Y., C., (2009), Multiple Thinking and Creativity in School Leadership: A new Paradigm for Sustainable Development, in S. Huber (ed.), Professionalization of School Leadership Long Hanborough: Peter Lang. Chiba, R., & Matsuura, H. (2004). Diverse Attitudes Toward Teaching Communicative English in Japan: Native VS. Nonnative Beliefs. Asia University Journal of International Relations, 13, 97‐118. ClaroNetwork, 2012 accessed at http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp? on December, 2012 Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. Thousands Oaks. CA. Sages. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. th Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2000) Research Methods in Education. (5 ed.). London: Routledge falmer. Dede, C. (1999). The Role of Emerging Technologies for Knowledge Mobilization’ Dissemination, and Use in Education.” Washington, D.C.: US. Education Department, [Online Accessed 12 may 2006] Dias L B & Atkinson S (2001) Technology integration: best practice – Where do teachers stand? International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning accessed at http://www.ucalgary.ca/ iejll/volumes/dias.html on December 2012 Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in Second Language Research: Construction, Administration, and Processing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Eadie, G. M. (2000). The Impact of ICT on Schools: Classroom Design and Curriculum Delivery: Winston Churchill Memorial Trust. Elmore, R. F. (1999). Building a New Structure for School Leadership and Management. Health American Educator, 23(4), 6‐ 13. Evoh, C. (2007, March 20). Policy networks and the transformation of secondary Education through ICTs in Africa: The prospects and challenges of the NEPAD e‐Schools initiative. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT [Online], 3(1). Available: http://ijedict.dec.uwi.edu/viewarticle.php?id=272layout=html. Fawcett, A. J. and Nicolson, R.I. (2000) Computer‐ assisted Reading Intervention in Schools: An Evaluation study British Journal of Educational Technology 31.4pp 333‐348. Fullan, M. (2002). Principals as Leaders in a Culture of Change, Educational Leadership online accessed 19TH MAY 2005] URL. http:www michaelfullan.ca/Articles‐02/03‐02.htm. Galabawa, J. C. J. & Agu, A. (2001). Perspectives in Education Management and Administration (Revised Ed.). Dare‐s ‐ Salaam: H. R. Consult. Gay, D.E. (2009). Doing Research in the Real World. (2nd Ed.). Los Angeles: Sage Publication.

460

Stephen Kyakulumbye and Isaac Wasswa Katono Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed Methods in Social Inquiry. San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass. Gustafson, M. (2005). The Relationships between Schooling Inputs and Outputs in South Africa: Methodologies and Policy Recommendations based on the 2000 SACMEQ Dataset http://www.sacmeq.org.org/links.htm Haddad, W. D. (2003). Is Instructional Technology a Must for Learning? Techknowlogi.org Retrieved,September 23, 2004, http://www.techknowlogia.org/TKL_active_pages2/CurrentArticles/main.asp?IssueNumber=19&FileType=HT Harris, A. (2005). Leading or Misleading? Distributed Leadership and School Improvement. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(3), 255‐265. Hay, l. (2001). Information Leadership: Managing the ICT Integration Equation, [Online accessed 21 Dec 2012] URL. http:www.school.za/PILP/leadership/docs/information‐leadership.htm Higgins, S. (2006). Identifying Feedback in Mathematical Activities Using ICT Education 3‐13 29.1pp 18‐32 Trenham Books. Isoda, T. (2004). Exploring Learners’ thoughts and Attributes Affecting Learning Strategy Use.JACET Bulletin, 39, 1‐14. Jonassen, D. (2000). Computers as Mind Tools for Schools: Engaging Critical Thinking (2nd Ed.) New Jersey: Pretince Hall. Kanjee, A., & Prinsloo, C. (2005). Improving Learning in South African Schools: The Quality Learning Project (QLP) Summative Evaluation (2000‐2004). Pretoria: Human Sciences Research Council. Kawooya, D. (2004). Universal Access to ICT and Lifelong Learning: Uganda’s experience. New Library World, 105(11), 423– 428. Kincaid Tanna & Feldner Lisa. (2002). Leadership for Technology Integration: The Role of Principals and Mentors. Educational Technology & Society Vol. 5(1) 2002 p 75‐ 80. Kozma, R.B. & Anderson, R.E. (2004). Qualitative Studies in Innovative Pedagogical Practices using ICT. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 387‐394. Krejcie, Robert V., Morgan, Daryle W. (1970). “Determining Sample Size for Research Activities”, Educational and Psychological Measurement,. Kozma, R., McGhee, R., Quellmalz, E., & Zalles, D. (2002). Closing the Digital Divide: Evaluation of the World Links Program. International Journal of Educational Development, 25(4), 361‐381. Leach, J. (2005). Do New Information and Communication Technologies have a Role to Play inAchieving Quality Professional Development for Teachers in the Global South? Curriculum Journal, 16(3), 293‐329. Lee, J. C., & Dimmock, C. (1999). Curriculum Leadership and Management in Secondary Schools: A Hong Kong Case Study. School Leadership & Management, 19(4), 455‐481. Lei, J., & Zhao, Y. (2007). Technology Uses and Student Achievement: A longitudinal Study. Computers & Education, 49(2), 284‐296. Louise, S. et al, (2006). Professional Learning Communities: A review of literature: Journal of Educational Change 7: 221‐ 258 DOI 10.1007/10833‐006‐0001‐8. Macdonald, R. (2006). Factors Contributing to Teacher Information Communication Technology Integration. th MCEETYA (2005). Information and Communication Technologies in Schools Taskforce. Retrived on May 17 2011. URL: http://cms.curriculum.edu.au/2003/ch9‐monitoring.htm Mehlinger, H. D. (1996). School Reform in the Information Age. Phi Delta Kappan. Mooji, T. (2007). Design of Educational and ICT Conditions to Integrate Different Differences in Learning: Contextual Learning Theory and a first transformation step in early Education. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), pp. 1499‐ 1530. Mosha, H. J. (2006). Capacity of School Management for Teacher Professional Development in Tanzania. Address. Delivered at a Workshop on the Role of Universities in Promoting Basic Education in Tanzania, held at the Millennium Towers Hotel, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, May 19. Phelps, R., Graham, A. & Kerr, B. (2004). Teachers and ICT: Exploring a Meta‐cognitive Approach to Professional th, Development. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology Vol. 20(1), 49‐68, Retrieved on may 20 2011 from Plomp, T., & Pelgrum, W. J. (1996). Restructuring of Schools as a Consequence of Computers. International Journal of Educational Research, 19, 185‐195. Rowland, G. & Adams, A. (2005). Systems Thinking in Instructional Design. In J. van den Akker (Ed.), Design Approaches and Tools in Education and Training (pp.29‐44). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publisher. Schiller, J. (2002). Interventions by School Leaders in Effective Implementation of Information Communication Technologies: Perceptions of Australian Principal, Journal Information Technology for Teacher Education, Vol. 11(3), 2002. Smeets, E., & Mooij. (1999). The Impact of Information Technology On the Teacher. Institute for Applied Social Sciences (ITS) University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Soudien, C. (2001). Teacher Responses to Rationalization: Transformation and Adaptation in the Western Cape, South Africa. International Studies in Educational Administration, 21, 33‐43. Southworth, G. (2002). Instructional Leadership in Schools: Reflections and Empirical Evidence.School Leadership and Management, 22(1), 73‐91. Spillane, J., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. (2004). Towards a Theory of Leadership Practice: A Distributed Perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3‐34.

461

Exploring an Empowerment Strategy for Blackboard in a Higher Education Institution Sibongile Simelane and Sibongile Ruth Ngcapu Teaching and Learning with Technology, Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria, South Africa simelanes@tut.ac.za ngcapurm@tut.ac.za Abstract: Lecturers in various institutions have taken advantage of technology and integrated it into their courses. Even though most of the lecturers who took part in this study followed this trend, there are still those lecturers who are resistant to technology. Higher education institutions should improve and enhance traditional course by taking the advantage of the Internet and technology to empower lecturers to use and integrate technology. In order to ensure the effective use of technology in course delivery, several higher education institutions offer technology‐enhanced teaching strategies to empower academics. Among the technological tools that are used in education for the delivery of courses, using online learning is commonly widespread. The purpose of the current study was to investigate whether the empowerment strategy for cascading Blackboard assisted the lecturers in designing and developing course content in Blackboard effectively. The question posed in this research was: How can the empowerment strategy for cascading Blackboard be integrated to optimally permit lecturers to incorporate technology into innovative teaching? In order to answer this question quantitative data was collected by means of an electronic survey questionnaire after the Blackboard workshops, document analysis such as attendance registers, workshop materials and a Blackboard tool usage report. Participants comprised 38 lecturers at a study university of technology in South Africa. Quantitative data was analysed using SPSS. This article reports on the empowerment strategy for cascading Blackboard. In doing this, we will discuss the development of an empowerment strategy to equip lecturers to design and develop course content in Blackboard. During the research, we established the number of active courses and the tool usage. Challenges that were encountered during the implementation of the strategy will be explained. Finally, lessons learned from the instructional designers’ perspective will be presented. Keywords: empowerment strategy, learning management system, blackboard, training and higher education

1. Introduction Worldwide, higher education institutions (HEIs) integrate the Internet, Web 2.0 and other technologies into teaching and learning. The development of technology in education has created innovative opportunities and challenges for teaching and learning. Lecturers in various institutions have taken advantage of technology and integrated it into their courses (Simelane, 2010). Even though most of the lecturers taking part in this study follow this trend, there are still those lecturers who are resistant to technology. Marra (2004) argues that technology‐enhanced teaching strategies to empower academics and face‐to‐face teacher education training are faced with the challenge of helping teachers to remain on top with the latest developments in the fast developing realm of information and communication technologies. In order to include technology to enhance teaching and learning, allowing courses to become more active and learner‐ centred, many institutions are involved with the redesigning of courses (Simelane, Blignaut & Van Ryneveld, 2007). In fact, the development of technologies that could be used to make education more effective have created opportunities for the development of new approaches in teaching and learning (Simelane, 2007). In this regard, Simelane (2010) argues that technology‐enhanced teaching, in its basic form, involves the use of some form of electronic media to enhance the learning process (Simelane, 2010). Instructional Designers assist lecturers in developing new media‐based instructional products (Liu et al., 2002). Tucker (2007) states that the IDs are expected to learn how to facilitate and collaborate with lecturers who may just be learning about technology tools and techniques available to them. This article reports on the empowerment strategy for cascading Blackboard. In doing this, we will discuss the development of an empowerment strategy to equip lecturers to design and develop course content in Blackboard. During the research, we established the number of active courses and the tool usage. Challenges that were encountered during the implementation of the strategy will be explained. Finally, lessons learned from the instructional designers’ perspective will be presented.

462

Sibongile Simelane and Sibongile Ruth Ngcapu

2. Teaching strategies Teaching strategies are approaches used by lecturers to create a conducive learning environment and to specify the nature of the activity in which the lecturer and student will be engaged during the lesson (Saskatchewan Education 1985). Effective teaching strategies are based on student success in the classroom (Felder and Brent 2005). Weinstein and Mayer (1983) argue that teaching students how to learn, what to learn, how to remember things and how to motivate themselves are what involves good teaching.

2.1 Traditional teaching strategies Traditional teaching strategies imply teaching without technology. Some examples of traditional teaching strategies are direct lecture, indirect lecture, experiential learning, independent study and interactive lecture as categorised by Caldwell (2005), Hadden (2005), Saskatchewan Education (1985, n.d.). Hadden (2005) and Saskatchewan Education (1985, n.d.) argue that the direct lecturer strategy is effective for actively engaging students in knowledge construction. According to Saskatchewan Education (1985), indirect lecture is student‐ centred. Hadden (2005) argues that the indirect lecture encourages students to generate alternatives to solve problems. Wikipedia (2001–2010) refers to the interactive strategy as a collaborating approach. In collaborating, students work together in groups, which allows students to talk, listen and discuss each other’s views (Wikipedia 2001–2010).

2.2 Technology enhanced teaching strategies The aim of the technology‐enhanced teaching strategies were to empower lecturers and academics to participate in the information age, to encourage innovative and collaborative uses of technology in education and to enhance the quality of teaching and learning (Simelane, 2010). Twigg (2003) argues that HEIs should improve and enhance traditional course material by taking advantage of the Internet and technology to empower lecturers to use and integrate technology into their teaching practices.

2.3 Learning management systems in higher education A learning management system (LMS) is a software application or Web‐based technology used to plan, implement and assess a specific learning process (Govender and Govender 2009). Adam (2010) argues that an LMS provides a designer or instructor with ways to build, create and deliver content, monitor student participation, and assess student performance. Other terms that are commonly used to refer to LMSs are course management systems (CMSs) or virtual learning environments (VLEs) or Electronic Classroom (EC). Examples of learning management systems are Blackboard, Moodle, Sakai, Angel and e‐College, etc. Broadbent (2002) states that LMSs are designed by a community of lecturers to address students’ demands. LMS such as Moodle, Blackboard, e‐College and Sakai are an essential part of today’s teaching and learning support infrastructure (Adams 2010). For the past decade, literature has revealed the incorporation of LMSs into traditional classrooms in most higher education institutions (Govender and Govender 2009). De Bra, Smits, Van der Sluijs, Cristea and Hendrix (2010) argue that the most beneficial aspects of LMSs focus on supporting the learning process and tests. The latest additions to LMSs incorporate the Web 2.0 tool or social networks and interaction tools such as discussion forums, chat rooms, blog, wikis, Flickr and YouTube videos, which provide students with the ability to interact and engage in an online environment.

2.4 Partners @work empowerment strategy Partners@Work (P@W) was a professional development programme, supported by management and academic staff, and designed to promote the optimal use of technology in teaching and learning at Tshwane University of Technology (Simelane 2008). The P@W programme consisted of four phases: capacity building, design and development, implementation and research (Van Ryneveld and Van der Merwe 2005).

2.5 Technology‐enhanced teaching empowerment strategy (TPACK) Technological, Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) is a technology‐enhanced teaching strategy developed by Mishra and Koehler (2006). Voogt (2010) pointed out the gap between what lecturers, teachers and instructors are teaching in their courses and the integration of technology in real classrooms. In this regard, the need to assist lecturers to bridge the gap between knowledge of good pedagogy, technical skills

463

Sibongile Simelane and Sibongile Ruth Ngcapu and content knowledge has been identified (Mishra and Koehler 2006) and (Voogt 2010). In an attempt to bridge this gap, Mishra and Koehler (2006) and Koehler and Mishra (2008) introduced the technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK or TPACK) strategy. TPACK was developed for lecturers, teachers and instructors to acquire a certain type of knowledge in order to incorporate technology into their teaching of a specific content area (Koehler and Mishra 2008; Koehler, Mishra and Yayha 2007; Mishra and Koehler 2006). It is reported (Burgoyne, Graham, and Sudweeks 2010) that this strategy clearly indicates that pedagogical applications of technology are intensely influenced by the content areas within which they are situated. A three‐tier strategy was developed, which made use of some principles of TPACK. In this three‐tier strategy, the emphasis is on teaching and learning rather than on technology. TPACK comprises an integrative knowledge base of technological knowledge and skills, as well as knowledge of students, subject matter content and pedagogy essential for lecturers, teachers and instructors to become competent to teach with technology in the classroom (Mayes and Morrison 2008, Tucker, 2007). This strategy emphasises the broad set of competencies lecturers, teachers and instructors require to integrate technology successfully into their teaching practices (Mayes and Morrison 2008, Tucker, 2007). The TPACK strategy describes the obscure interaction between a lecturer’s knowledge of content (CK), pedagogy (PK) and technology (TK). This interaction results in four additional knowledge types, for instance pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), technological content knowledge (TCK), technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK), and technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) (Koehler and Mishra 2008; Mishra and Koehler 2006).

2.6 The role of instructional designer Liu, Gibby, Quiros and Demps (2002) argue that one of the primary tasks of an instructional designer is to plan the instruction so that the students can use cognitive strategies to learn the material actively. Therefore, the ID should understand the needs and wants of the client, the objective and the audience of the completed project, the capabilities of the programmer and the graphic artist, and available technology tools, and should have design and project management skills (Liu et al., 2002). IDs play a crucial role as change agents in the implementation of educational technology (Ensminger and Surry 2002).

3. Empowerment strategy for cascading Blackboard 9 The three‐tier empowerment strategy for cascading Blackboard was developed with the integration of the TPACK strategy. The aim of this strategy was to reach out and introduce the use of technology in teaching and learning to all staff members across all faculties. In doing this, Ma and Runyon (2004) pointed out that the effective use of new technologies could increase academic productivity and enhance both teaching and learning. The departmental Blackboard empowerment workshops were implemented per faculty. Workshops were conducted the based on the developed strategy.

3.1 The context of three‐tier strategy The team of IDs designed the three‐tier strategy. The three‐tier strategy was divided into basic or introduction, intermediate and advanced levels. The first tier, basic or introduction, consisted of the content base, basic functions and communication tools in Blackboard. The second tier, intermediate, entailed of interactive tools and e‐assessment. The third tier, advanced, comprised collaborative tools and Web 2.0. The empowerment sessions were then organised according to the three tiers and the lecturers’ knowledge and experience of Blackboard. The lecturers were taken through the main features of the platform and a demonstration of how the tools function and integrate with the learning content was done. The lecturers were also empowered on how to upload material in the course and how to make it available to students. The IDs emphasised that learning material should be available for students to access 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Students should not have to rely on the lecturers for acquiring learning content but had to be able to access information anytime, anywhere and everywhere where they had Internet connection. In addition to uploading content, lecturers were then empowered on the use and integration of basic communication tools. The communication tools gave the lecturers the opportunity to communicate with students about the learning content uploaded and vice versa. Making material available to students gave them an opportunity to apply a learner‐centred

464

Sibongile Simelane and Sibongile Ruth Ngcapu approach and problem‐solving rather than a content‐based approach, where the lecturers explain and know everything about the learning content. In the intermediate tier, the empowerment incorporated interactive tools and e‐assessment. This was done in order to promote active learning, engagement and interaction among students. The intermediate tier assisted lecturers in assessing their students continuously so that the lecturers would know whether the students understood and grasped the concepts taught. Students on their own could also assess their level of understanding of the learning material. Therefore, a self‐directed learning, student‐centred approach was encouraged by the activities used in the intermediate phase. Lecturers were also empowered on the use of e‐ plagiarism software such as Turnitin and SafeAssign. These programs teach students how to summarise and acknowledge work from other sources when engaging with their assignments. IDs provided a demonstration of the collaborative tools or Web 2.0. The importance of integrating collaborative tools into the learning content was emphasised. These collaborative tools were also imbedded in Blackboard 9. Blackboard provided space and hosts various applications. The three‐tier empowerment strategy became a turnaround strategy in terms of integration of Blackboard institution‐wide. Figure 1 illustrates the Blackboard three‐tier empowerment strategy.

Figure 1: Blackboard three‐tier empowerment strategy

4. The role of instructional designers at a study university In 1989, Department ZZ was established at a study university to support lecturers interested in using technology in education. A team of instructional designers (IDs) collaborated with lecturers on the design and development of content, materials and learning activities and with the incorporation of technology. In this regard, Department ZZ came up with the strategy of one instructional designer per faculty. This was accomplished in order for the IDs to increase the use of technology in teaching and learning institution‐wide. There were seven faculties at the study institution and there were five instructional designers. Due to a lack of capacity and manpower, some of the instructional designers take care of two faculties.

5. Methodology Quantitative data is data in a numerical form derived from questionnaires or structured interviews, which is linked to natural science or a positivist perspective (Moon and Moon 2004). On the basis of the definition by Moon and Moon, quantitative data was used in the study being reported here. It was used as a guide in making an explicit choice of data collection techniques and analysis procedures. Quantitative data was collected by means of a survey questionnaire, an attendance register and LMS statistics. Data was analysed using Statistical Package Statistical Software (SPSS), Participants were selected using a non‐probability sampling. Non‐probability sampling is essential especially if statistical inferences are to be made about the data, which was the case in this study (Sandelowski 2000). White (2005) states that, according to non‐ probability sampling, a researcher uses subjects who happen to be accessible, efficient and inexpensive to conduct research. In terms of ethical issues, all information obtained was dealt with in a confidential manner and the anonymity of all participants and the study site was guaranteed. Participants’ answers were totally

465

Sibongile Simelane and Sibongile Ruth Ngcapu anonymous and their identities were not revealed under any circumstance. The pseudonyms used in this study are: Faculty of X and Y, Department of AA, BB, CC, DD and Department of ZZ.

5.1 Participants Participants were lecturers at a study university of technology in South Africa. These lecturers attended departmental Blackboard workshops organised by IDs at their respective faculties. The three‐tier strategy was employed during these workshops with the focus on tier one, basic or introduction stage.

5.2 Instruments and procedure Data was collected by means of a survey questionnaire, an attendance registers, LMS statistics and Department of ZZ’s strategic document. Participants were requested to respond to a questionnaire via email after the empowerment session to establish their opinion on the empowerment. The questionnaire comprised five questions, to which participants had to respond according to a five‐point Likert‐type scale, for example, “Overall learning value from the workshop” 1 = weak, 2 = unconvincing, 3 = unacceptable, 4 = good and 5 = great, and “How did facilitators’ skills contribute towards your learning?” 1 = weak, 2 = mediocre, 3 = basic, 4 = strong, 5 = exceptional. Data about the biographic information of the participants was obtained from the attendance register. To determine the number of courses developed in Blackboard and the tool usage, authors used statistics from the LMS. The Department of ZZ’s strategic document was used to collect data about the role of the IDs in equipping the lecturers, academic and support staff to integrate technology in teaching and learning.

6. Results 6.1 Participants Participants’ biographic information was obtained from the attendance registers. Participants comprised 38 lecturers at a study university of technology in South Africa. There were 27 (71.1%) participants from the Faculty of X and 11 (28.9%) participants from the Faculty of Y. In the Faculty of X, 14 participants (36.8%) were from the Department of AA and 13 (34.2%) were from the Department of BB. In the Faculty of Y, 6 participants (15.8%) were from the Department of CC, and 5 (13.2%) were from the Department of DD. Of the participants, 18 (47.4%) were male and 20 (53.6%) were female.

6.2 Course and tool usage in Blackboard Table 1 shows the number of courses developed in the four departments, and the tool usage. The results show that 180 courses were registered in Blackboard. Approximately 137 courses were active. Results also revealed that approximately 101 learning material were uploaded. Of the four departments, the Department of AA did not use the communication tools. Results also showed that 44 online courses used announcements, 37 used a calendar and 29 made use of email. The results reported on course and tool usage in Blackboard were reliable and valid because they were taken from the LMS. Table 1: Courses and tool usage in Blackboard Department Courses registered Active courses Learning material Announcements Calendar Email AA 26 23 12 ‐ ‐ ‐ BB 31 31 20 15 10 5 CC 52 36 36 10 8 5 DD 71 47 33 19 19 19

6.3 Lecturers’ views on the empowerment strategy Results showed that 38 (100%) participants responded to the survey questionnaire. The participants’ means scores for each item were as follows: item 1: M = 4.05 SD = .655, item 2: M = 4.05 SD = .613, item 3: M = 3.61 SD = .718, item 4: M = 3.82 SD = .563, item 5: M = 3.53 SD = .667, item 6: M = 4.05 SD = .655. Cronbach’s alpha (Cronbach 1951) values obtained from scores of the survey questionnaire by the participants were 0.70. The alpha values were fair (in other words, greater than or equal to 0.70 and less than 0.90) (Cicchetti 1994). Reliability was acceptable here because the internal consistency of scores from the participants were equal to 0.70. The validity of the instrument was accepted.

466

Sibongile Simelane and Sibongile Ruth Ngcapu To get the lecturers’ perspective on the overall empowerment strategy, a survey questionnaire was administered. Results showed that 38 (100%) participants responded. In this study, participants were requested to respond to a question about the ‘overall learning value from the workshop. The results showed that 7 (18.4%) rated it as acceptable, 22 (57.9%) as good, and 23.7% as great. Participants’ views on the contribution of the facilitators’ skill toward their learning revealed that 6 (15.8%) rated it as basic, 24 (63.2%) as strong, and 8 (21.1%) as exceptional. Regarding the quality of learning material used during the workshop, results showed that participants 20 (52.6%) thought it was acceptable, 13 (34.2%) thought it was valuable, and 5 (13.2%) thought it was great. Results also revealed that 10 (26.3%) participants accepted the quality of hand‐ out material, 25 (65.8%) valued the hand‐outs and 3 (7.9%) felt that the quality of the hand‐out material was great. About the logistical arrangement of the workshop, results show that 1 (2.6%) participant felt it was insufficient, 19 (50.0%) thought it was moderate, and 3 (7.9%) believed it was great.

7. Discussion 7.1 Courses and tool usage in Blackboard The results showed that after the workshop, participants did register their courses in Blackboard. There was also an increase in the number of courses registered. Looking closely at the number of active courses in Blackboard, this implies that online learning did take place, because various tools of tier one was activated and used by the participants and their students. Results also showed that learning material such as the study guide, lecturer notes in a form of MS Word, a PowerPoint presentation, PDF documents and previous question papers and memoranda were uploaded in the courses. Furthermore, results also showed that basic communication tools such as announcements, calendars and e‐mail, which formed part of tier one were used in the courses, except in Department AA.

7.2 Lecturers’ views on empowerment strategy Results showed that participants observed the usefulness of the learning value in terms of integrating Blackboard in their teaching practices. Participants were confident with their facilitators as IDs were empowering lecturers to incorporate technology effectively in their courses. Participants also valued the quality of training material and the quality of hand‐outs that were issued during the workshop. IDs had to ensure that the logistical arrangements were in place before the workshops. Relevant stakeholders, such as technicians and administrators, were informed beforehand about the workshop and the requirement. The IDs had to secure the venue with all the technologies and the software required. This was done in order to ensure the smooth implementation of the workshop without glitches. Participants felt that the introductory workshop, tier one of Blackboard, proved effective in the integration of Blackboard in teaching and learning and reduced the technophobia. They were only introduced to the content tools and basic communication tools as compared to the P@W empowerment strategy where various technologies were taught simultaneously. The emphasis on a three‐tier strategy was based on TPACK where the highlight was on supporting the lecturers to make the link between knowledge of good pedagogy, technical skills and content knowledge.

7.3 Challenges encountered during the implementation of the strategy Inability of lecturers to attend the empowerment sessions became problematic. Empowerment sessions were usually run during the day simultaneously with lecturing time. Other lecturers were on distant campuses; therefore, not all lecturers were able to attend empowerment sessions as desired because of getting to the right place on time. Furthermore, most of the lecturers were not familiar with the new version of Blackboard. Different levels of computer literacy hampered the implementation process. Some lecturers needed more attention than others, which retarded the progress of the workshop, as the facilitators had to offer basic skills while carrying on with the workshop. The biggest challenge that the researchers encountered during the workshops was from the Faculty of X. where the lecturers indicated that they had never used Blackboard before.

7.4 Lessons learned IDs spent extra time and worked collaboratively in designing and developing the workshop materials. The material developed collaboratively proved to be a success during the implementation. A pilot workshop on the

467

Sibongile Simelane and Sibongile Ruth Ngcapu new LMS proved to be a success and gave instructional designers a way forward in introducing the new version of the system. The workshops provided lecturers with a clear step‐by‐step guide on how to use various tools in Blackboard. This assisted lecturers in working on their own, which increased the do‐it‐yourself strategy. Organising departmental workshops proved to be successful, as the drive originated from the Deans and HODs from all the Faculties. We saw an increase in the number of empowerment attendances and the number of lecturers using the LMS.

8. Conclusions In conclusion, we saw how the three‐tier empowerment strategy for cascading Blackboard was developed with the integration of the TPACK strategy and implemented in various departments with the focus on tier one. We also observed how the lecturers became the primary source of the adjustments in the quality of the content (Govender and Govender 2009) and the uploading of the content in Blackboard. This was obvious by the increase in the number of developed courses. We also saw an increase in the number of active courses in Blackboard as well as the usage of the learning content and communication tools. In this regard, Blackboard was implemented effectively with its connection to knowledge of good pedagogy, technical skills and content knowledge. Findings in this study revealed that tier one (the basic or introductory stage) was implemented successfully. The basic or introductory stage of the empowerment strategy improved Blackboard usage amongst lecturers. In all, participants in this study perceived the Blackboard workshop to be useful and effective and that helped them to reduce technophobia and be able to teach using this technology/innovative tool. Although the study produced positive results in terms of implementation of the empowerment strategy for cascading Blackboard, challenges were encountered, like a lack of attendance, poor levels of computer literacy and a lack of knowledge of LMS.

9. Recommendation Based on the findings reported here, it is recommended that, in case of any introduction of LMS in the institution, the department entrusted to promoting technology in teaching and learning get the buy‐in from top management in order for the institution to use LMSs, as the top‐down model needs to be emphasised. Technology‐enhanced teaching should be a standing item at the Faculty’s executive committee meetings so that it can gain the interest of other stakeholders in the Faculty. It is crucial that the service provider’s training material be customised to suit and meet the requirements and the environment of the institution. A further research study is recommended that will look at the implementation of intermediate and advanced tiers of the strategy.

References Adams, C. (2010) "Learning management systems as sites of surveillance, control, and corporatization: A review of the critical literature.", In: Dodge, D. G. B., ed. Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference Chesapeake, VA, AACE. Broadbent, B. (2002) ABC's of e‐learning: Reaping the benefits and avoiding the pitfalls, Jossey‐Bass/Pfeiffer, San Francisco. Burgoyne, N., Graham, C. R. & Sudweeks, R. (2010) "Assessing the validity and reliability of an instrument measuring TPACK", Society for information and technology teacher education International conference. AACE. http://www.washington.edu/uif/PETTTreview.pdf Caldwell, J. E. (2005) "Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best‐practice tips", CBE Life Sciences Education, Vol 6, No. 1, pp 9‐20. Cicchetti, D. V. (1994) "Guidelines, criteria and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology", Psychological Assessment, Vol 6, pp 284‐290. Cronbach, L. J. (1951) "Coeffiecient alpha and the internal structure of tests", Psychometrika, Vol 16, pp 297‐334. De Bra, P., Smits, D., van der Sluijs, K., Cristea, A. & Hendrix, M. (2010) "GRAPPLE: Personalization and Adaptation in Learning Management Systems. ", Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications Chesapeake, VA, AACE. Ensminger, C. D. & Surry, D. W. (2002) "Faculty perception of factors that facilitate the implementation of online programs", [Online]: University of South Alabama, http://iphase.org/papers/msitc02.pdf. Felder, M. & Brent, R. (2005). “Understanding student differences. Journal of Engineering Education”, [Online], 94,: http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/papers. Govender, D. & Govender, I. (2009) "Using learning management systems (LMS) to support learning.", In: Gibson, ed. Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, Chesapeake, VA, AACE. Hadden, C. (2005) "Making connections: Instructional strategies", [Online], http://education.uregina.ca/iteachered/modules/preservice/module3.html.

468

Sibongile Simelane and Sibongile Ruth Ngcapu Koehler, M. & Mishra, P. (2008). " Introducing TPCK". In: Technology, A. C. o. I. a. (ed.) Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators Routledge, New York. Koehler, M., Mishra, P. & Yayha, K. (2007) "Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integration content, knowledge & pedagogy", Computers & Education, Vol 49,No 3, pp 373‐396. Liu, M., Gibby, S., Quiros, M. & Demps, E. (2002) "Challenges of being an instructional designer for mewmedia development: A view from the Practitioners", Jl. of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, Vol 11, No. 3, pp 195‐ 219. Ma, Y. & Runyon, L. R. (2004) "Academic synergy in the age of technology‐a new instructional paradigm", [Online], Washington: Journal of Education for Business, http://proquest.umi.com/pdqweb?did=692351181&sid=1&Fmt=4&clientld=36149&RQT=309&VName=PQD. Marra, R. M. (2004) "An online course to help teachers use technology to enhance learning: Success and Limitations", [Online], Norfolk: Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, http://proquest.umi.com/pdqweb?did=757578841&sid=12&Fmt=4&clientld=36149&RQT=309&VName=PQD. Mayes, T. J. & Morrison, D. (2008) "You take the high road: national programmes for the development of e‐learning in Higher Education", Reflecting Education, Vol 4, No. 1, pp 6‐16. Mishra, P. & Koehler, M. J. (2006) "Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge", Teacher College Recors, Vol 106, No. 6, pp1017‐1054. Moon, J. & Moon, S. (2004). The Case for mixed methodology research: A review of literature and methods. United Kingdom: e‐mel LLP. Sandelowski, M. (2000) "Combining qualitatite and quantitative sampling, data collection, and analysis techniques in mixed‐method studies", Research in Nursing Health, Vol 23, pp 246‐255. Saskatchewan Education. (1985) "Approaches to Instruction ", [Online], http://www.sasked.gov.sk.ca/docs/natives30/nt30app.html. Saskatchewan Education. (n.d.) " Saskatchewan learning, instructional models, strategies, methods, and skills, instructional approaches: A framework for professional practice", [Online], http://www.saskschool.ca/curr_content/onlineteach/instructionalstrategies/instructionalstrategies.htm. Simelane, S. (2008) Success indicators and barriers in implementing technology‐enhanced modules during the professional development programme, MEd in Educational Technology MEd Dissertation, Tshwane University of Technology. Simelane, S. (2010). "Professional Development Programme in the use of educational technology to implement technology‐enhanced courses successfully". In: In Mukerji, S. & Tripathi, P. (eds.) Cases on Technology Enhanced Learning Through Collaborative Opportunities, IGI USA. Simelane, S., Blignaut, A. S. & van Ryneveld, L. (2007) "Preparing lecturers to integrate technology into their teaching and learning practices", SAJHE, Vol 21, No. 7, pp 940‐953. Tucker, C. (2007) "What does an instructional designer do?", [Online], http://christytucker.wordpress.com/2007/05/26/what‐does‐an‐instructional‐designer‐do/ Van Ryneveld, L. & Van der Merwe, H. (2005). Partners@Work Teaching and Learning with Technology 2005 Manual., Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria. Voogt, J. (2010). Strategies for teacher professional development on TPACK.Twigg, C. (2003) "Change. Improving quality and reducing cost; design for effective learning", [Online]: New Rochelle, http://proquest.umi.com/pdweb?did=592388111&sid=10&Fmt=3&clientld=21888&RQT=309&VName=PQD. Weinstein, C. E. & Mayer, E. R. (1983). The teaching of learning strategies. Innovation abstract. Journal of Reading [Online], 5.: http://eric.ed.gov/PDF/ED237180.pdf. White, C. J. (2005) Research: A practical guide, Intuthuko Investments, Pretoria. Wikipedia. (2001‐2010) "Wikipedia online encyclopaedia", [Online]: wikipedia contributors, http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Professional_development.

469

470

Masters Research papers

471

472

Lecturer Perceptions on the use of Social Networking Services in Education Ricardo da Rocha and Antoinette Lombard Department of Information and Communication Technology, Faculty of Applied and Computer Sciences, Vaal University of Technology, Vanderbijlpark, South Africa ricardo@vut.ac.za alombard@vut.ac.za Abstract: Facebook is a massive, worldwide social networking phenomena with over 1 billion active users, many of those accessing Facebook’s functionality through mobile technologies, and is arguably the most popular platform for online social networking amongst the youth and university students. The research presented in this paper focuses on the perceptions and usage of social networking services, and in particular Facebook, by staff members of the department of information and communication technology at the Vaal University of Technology. The advantages of this new Web 2.0 medium and the possible effect it can have on the academic performance of learners by actively integrating the experience both inside and outside the classroom are looked at, and the different levels of course integration at a lecturer’s disposal are illustrated. Its effectiveness as a communication tool, content delivery tool and organizational tool is looked at and examined with a contrast against traditional content management systems and learning management systems such as Sakai and Moodle, with the advantages and disadvantages of each being discussed. Particular focus in given to access through mobile technologies as the low penetration of fixed broadband within the South African market has led to an increased uptake in internet access through a mobile medium, with a significant skew in popularity favouring Blackberry devices manufactured by Research in Motion (RIM) due to its relative low barrier of entry cost and fixed monthly internet access fee through Blackberry Internet Services (BIS). Initial results, measuring lecturers’ perceptions with regard to the use of Facebook are favourable with a few caveats. It is suggested that future research could encompass an interdisciplinary study with a considerably larger sample size, while education‐focused social networking services, such as Edmodo, could also be included as part of a new study on the perceptions of tertiary institution lecturers on the use of social networking services in the education and learning process of learners. Keywords: higher education, social networks, Facebook, YouTube, e‐learning, lecturer perception

1. Introduction There are many learning paradigms in the academic field such as behaviourism, cognitism and constructivism, many of which have been used since the advent of universities and other learning institutions (Sjøberg 2010). However, the advent and subsequent popularization of the internet in the early 1990s has led to the development of new learning paradigms. One such subsequent paradigm is e‐learning. In general, e‐learning is the expression broadly used to describe “instructional content or learning experience delivered or enabled by electronic technologies” (Ong et al. 2004). The subsequent improvement in mobile technologies and specifically, the increasing edification and proliferation of mobile smart phones, have introduced another new learning paradigm, namely m‐learning, which can be briefly defined as the intersection between mobile computing (i.e. the application of small, portable and wireless communication and computing devices) and learning (Jacob and Isaac 2008). Developing and using existing web‐based technologies in the classroom have become an expectation in higher academia to enhance student learning and extend learning opportunities outside of the classroom (Beebe et al. 2010). One such method of addressing these concerns is the use of Content Management Software (CMSs) or Learning Management Systems (LMSs), programs designed to extend and convert the classroom into an electronic learning environment (Naveh et al. 2010). However, LMSs have a fairly high learning curve for both facilitators and learners, and the integration of an LMS into a tertiary institution is not only time‐consuming and difficult, but a constant challenge in maintenance and the introduction of new features. The use of web‐based social networking utilities such as Facebook and Twitter could potentially be used to alleviate the challenges posed by LMSs, as these utilities provide a vast array of powerful tools for sharing information and contacting both individuals and groups. They provide simplified access to information that the use of an LMS can overcomplicate, removing the need for a learner to access a separate software program being hosted on an institution’s intranet through an institution‐specific uniform resource location or internet

473

Ricardo da Rocha and Antoinette Lombard protocol address. In many cases, the use of these web‐based social utilities can be facilitated through the use of a mobile device such as a cellular phone.

2. Background 2.1 Facebook Facebook was launched in February of 2004, and it attracted a large number of users in a relatively small amount of time compared with other social networking services (Boyd and Ellison 2007). Facebook can be defined as “a social utility that helps people share information and communicate more efficiently with their friends, family and co‐workers” (facebook.com). While Facebook was launched specifically at the Harvard University as a student only social networking site, it grew to encompass high school students within the United States, professionals within their corporate networks and final the larger international online community as a whole (Cassidy 2006). Facebook features capabilities such as hosting an online personal profile, sharing photos and personal posts with friends, family, co‐workers and the public, playing online social games and hosting social groups with common interests, messages friends directly with instant messaging and more. It has become part of the fabric of the daily lives for many people around the world, and as of October 12 has over 1 billion active users, 81% of these being outside of the greater United States and Canada (http://newsroom.fb.com/Key‐Facts, Date of Access: 18 January 2013). Because of these features and the ingraining of Facebook into everyday lives, Ellison, Steinfeld and Lampe (2007) have identified an increase in the interest of researchers in Facebook. Mason (2006) also considered Facebook to be a useful education tool because of its ability to enable peer feedback, its interactive tools and its goodness of fit with within the social context of individuals. Many of Facebook users fall within the 18 – 25 age range, identifying them as mostly university students (Bumgarner 2007).

2.2 Educational technologies Foko (2009) examined how mobile technologies were being used to enhance the learning process in South African tertiary institutions, and found the presence of mobile devices introducing advanced features such as email systems and internet access to be ubiquitous amongst learners. In a country that is bandwidth‐starved with a low penetration of internet broadband access, an internet‐enabled cellular phone becomes the primary way of accessing online information. Some attempts at replacing LMSs with the use of Social Networking Services (SNSs) such as Facebook and Twitter have been attempted. For example, LaRue (2012) conducted a case study in this field. However, no research could be found addressing the improvement of the learning process and academic performance of learners using SNSs.

2.3 Research into the viability of social networking services in the learning process In most organizations SNSs are seen as being a negative force which wastes time and resources (Baltatzis et al. 2008). However, given the initial research into this study, a realization is reached that social media is becoming increasingly popular and has become part of modern culture, even if its importance is not recognized. Some research has been undertaken in measuring the significance of the frequency of use of Facebook and student engagement in the learning environment using a relatively large sample size (N = 2368), and it was found that time spent engaging in certain Facebook activities could be positively predictive, such as time spent on co‐ curricular activities, while time spent engaging in certain Facebook activities could be negatively predictive, such as time spent playing online games (Junco 2011). Another two studies have gaged how university students felt about lecturer use of Facebook for student interaction, and contrary to popular belief it was discovered the only 15% of students reported that they would feel that their privacy was violated due to lecturers seeking to use Facebook for education purposes (Roblyer et al. 2011). In fact, a small survey performed by Mazer, Murphy and Simonds (2007) found that many students experienced higher levels of learning and personal motivation when lecturers maintained a more open relationship with them on Facebook. However, in contrast it was found that while 77% of lecturers engaged in personal social networking activities and 60% of lecturers reported using some form of social media in class, only 4% reported using Facebook in class (Moran et al. 2011). Based on Sandars (2005), there has been limited research conducted on SNSs facets of learning, especially supporting F2F learning interaction with SNSs. Furthermore, Ramirez and Wang (2008) argue that the potential impact of online social network

474

Ricardo da Rocha and Antoinette Lombard sites like Facebook on the academia is still unclear. Since SNSs are often used by students for online academic networking, it is critical to study the pedagogical potential of this e‐learning technology (Towner and VanHorn 2007).

3. Research method 3.1 Research context A qualitative, thematic analysis was undertaken with staff members of an information and communication department, employees who are assumed to be familiar with emerging technologies, to gauge their attitudes towards SNSs and the use of these technologies in the classroom and for higher educational purposes. This paper reports on the findings of the qualitative thematic analysis in which staff members of the institution were interview on how they felt about the use of SNSs in the classroom and their opinions regarding this technology. The interviews were semi‐structured with open‐ended questions to allow a more in‐depth understanding of the phenomena (refer Appendix A), and the interviews were conducted during the 2 nd half of 2012 during the 2nd semester of the South African university academic calendar.

3.2 Participants The participants of the research presented in this paper were staff members in the information and communication technology department of the Vaal University of Technology. It was expected that staff of the department will have the necessary experience with emerging and new information technologies in education (refer Table 1).

3.3 Data collection For the purpose of this paper, information was gathered from the staff participants through the use of semi‐ structured interviews with open‐ended questions. All lecturers interviewed were older than 30, except two between 20 and 30 who are considered to be belonging to the net generation age group, that is, the generation defined as growing up with easy access to information through the internet (Oblinger and Oblinger, 2005).

3.4 Data analysis All the interviews were audio‐recorded and transcribed verbatim so to ensure maximum viability of the data. The data was then iteratively analysed, which is a common approach to the analysis of qualitative data (Coffey and Atkinson, 1996). Common themes and their supporting narratives relating to the research questions presented in this paper were then identified.

4. Results Five staff members were interview during the course of this study. In Table 1, their age and gender are portrayed. Table 1: Staff participants Lecturer Age Gender Lecturer 1 29 Female Lecturer 2 39 Male Lecturer 3 27 Male Lecturer 4 38 Male Lecturer 5 40 Female

In the interviews, staff were first asked whether they had made any personal use of SNSs and through what medium or platform. With the prevalence of smartphones in the South African market place, especially low cost Blackberry devices, it was no surprise that the preferred medium of access was through a mobile device. One of the lecturers indicated that he found SNSs, Facebook in particular, to be of no interest and only accessed Facebook once or twice a month. Narratives were found to support this. “Honestly, I don’t see what so attractive on Facebook. People on my wall never have anything interesting to say so I hardly ever log in, maybe once or twice a month.” (Lecturer 2)

475

Ricardo da Rocha and Antoinette Lombard Surprisingly, the youngest lecturer at 27 did not have a Facebook account until the beginning of 2013. One of the lecturer’s major concerns about Facebook was the lack of privacy it would introduce to his personal life, and the prospect of being “bombarded” with constant notifications of Facebook posts on his Blackberry device was unappealing. “You’ll lose so much time of the day if you have to constantly look at your phone because of the constant stream of Facebook notifications.” (Lecturer 3) When asked about the advantages of being part of an SNS, many of the lecturers agreed that it was an excellent avenue of communication. It allows them to stay in contact with people they might not otherwise see on a daily basis. “I’m able to stay up‐to‐date with friends who I would otherwise have lost touch with when we finished university and went our separate ways.” (Lecturer 1) Lecturers were then asked how they remained in communication with their students outside of class. The majority of lecturers restricted this to face‐to‐face consultation time. However, lecturer 3 indicated had substituted email in lieu of SNSs, and that because of the link between the lecturer’s Exchange account on the domain and the lecturer’s Blackberry device, the lecturer was able to receive emails from students through the device’s push service and reply to them almost immediate. When asked why this solution was chosen it was indicated: “… that it allows me to respond to students almost in real‐time.” (Lecturer 3) This is a very similar setup to how an SNS would work on a Blackberry device, and the features being used could be duplicated with an SNS setup. This could indicate an unfamiliarity with the lecturer and the features available on Facebook, due to the lecturer’s relative inexperience with the platform. Another lecturer indicated that they had a reliance on the university’s chosen LMS to communicate with students. The lecturer is using the LMS to schedule class events, assignments and tests, conduct simply online tests for formative purposes, and as a repository for class resources and additional non‐class related learning materials. However, this did come with hidden caveats in that the LMS is unreliable and has a fairly common history of downtime. Problems with students not logging onto the LMS regularly enough and missing communications from the lecturer were also a frequent occurrence. “I use the LMS quite often to communicate with my students … at least, when it’s up and the students have logged on to check the latest announcements.” (Lecturer 2) The lecturers were then asked whether they had implemented the use of any SNSs within their own classes or teaching methods. Lecturer 1 indicated that they had chosen to create a Facebook group to communicate with the students registered for the lecturer’s module. The lecturer has actually switched to this as the primary contact and information delivery method for the students registered for that module. The reasons indicated for this was because of Facebook’s almost 100% uptime and the ease of access to the group through the lecturer’s smartphone. An unintended consequence that surprised the lecturer was that students started asking module‐related questions in the Facebook group, and that students began answering and helping each other, thereby facilitating peer‐relatable learning between the students. “The students began asking questions regarding work that I had covered in class and concepts that they didn’t understand, and to my surprise, before I could even get the chance to answer, another student answered and started helping the student to better understand what was said in class.” (Lecturer 1) Many of the lecturers indicated a willingness to use Facebook or other SNSs in their classroom environment and within their teaching methods, though there was some reluctance with regards to the aspect of privacy. They felt it wouldn’t be conducive to their teaching and to the students’ learning experience if the use of an SNS would result in a bleeding effect between the personal and social aspect of their lives and the work and education aspects of their lives, “It would seem unprofessional to me if students had complete access to my profile and me to their profiles. A sense of professionalism needs to be maintained between a lecturer and a student, and full access to personal lives may compromise that.” (Lecturer 1) This was also a concern of lecturer 2, but a theme was discovered in the narrative of the interviews indicating that lecturers were working under the preconception that using SNSs, Facebook in particular, meant

476

Ricardo da Rocha and Antoinette Lombard befriending the students directly and communicating via your personal profile. They seemed unaware of the capability of Facebook to create private, topic‐focused groups that work on an application‐acceptance basis and do not require the sharing of an individual’s personal profile or the befriending of others. Another lecturer indicated that while they were comfortable into integrating an SNS into their teaching methods, this would only be for outside the classroom as it was felt that allowing access to SNSs within the classroom would prove more of a distraction to the student and that less learning and absorption of the lessons taught it class would occur. “I can see the use for such a communication and educational tool outside of class, but I feel that allowing free access to Facebook inside of the class could result in being more distracting to the student than educational. There would be no way to monitor what the student was doing if they were accessing their Facebook from their own personal device.” (Lecturer 4) The same lecturer indicated that introducing a communication and educational tool via an SNS could have initial high barriers to overcome, mainly due to the initial cost of smart devices as well as the relatively high cost of mobile data in South Africa. This was loosely echoed by another lecturer who also indicated an eagerness to implement some sort of social‐based educational tool, but like with the LMS, the lecturer worried about whether the information technology infrastructure would be up to challenge. “I’m worried that the internet might go down and the students who do not have access to a mobile phone with internet access would miss out on resources or information that those with smartphones would be able to access.” (Lecturer 2) The lecturer also indicated that the use of an SNS in addition to an LMS could affect staff attitude because of the perceived increase in workload to maintain two educational resources simultaneously. “I already have problems managing my current workload while converting my normal class resources to an electronic format for the LMS.” (Lecturer 2) This limitation has also been suggested by an earlier study by Bennet and Lockyer (2004) regarding the perceived increase in workload by providing greater learning flexibility for students.

5. Conclusion This paper focused on investigating staff attitudes towards the use of SNSs in the teaching and learning process at the Vaal University of Technology. The research in this paper is important to university staff as well as curriculum and educational designers. Modern students that fall in the net generation classification are living in an interconnected world where social interaction is a priority, and universities and education are notoriously slow to change and adapt to emerging technologies (Bennet and Lockyer, 2004). This paper has reported the finding from a South African case study regarding the use of SNSs in a university of technology, and specifically the staff perceptions of the possible effect of introducing SNSs to the educational process. It has shown that while lecturers are cautionary regarding the use of SNSs, they are also optimistic about the potential advantages that an introduction could bring. There was also an indication that there could be a misconception of how SNSs could be used to make the learning and teaching process more flexible due to preconceived notions of a lack of personal privacy. This could be attributed to the lack of experience and in‐ depth knowledge and features of an SNS. Finally, there was an indication in the notion that introducing SNSs as an educational tool could further increase the workload of lecturers. This paper is part of a bigger research project and thus is limited in scope and size. Also, the sample size, thus the number of staff interviewed, was also limited in order to get more detailed information from individuals. This study only focussed on the regular version of Facebook and did not take into account the current development of increased academic features for Facebook. A pilot study, specifically considering the academic features of Facebook are currently being executed in the United States with a very limited and select number of institutions. Future research could include a broader, interdisciplinary study involving the use of SNSs to improve the teaching and learning process for students and staff across different faculties and perhaps inter‐ institutionary. Future, similar research could also be undertaken to investigate the effect of Edmodo on the teaching and learning process. Edmodo is a social platform with features similar to those of Facebook but also includes features found in more traditional LMSs.

Appendix A. Example of staff interview questions

Do you make use of social networking in a personal capacity?

477

Ricardo da Rocha and Antoinette Lombard

Do you currently use any emerging technologies in your classroom such as mobile technologies or social networks?

Do you perceive any advantages to using social networks for the teaching and learning process in your classroom?

Do you perceive any disadvantages to using social networks for the teaching and learning process in your classroom?

How do you currently communicate with your students outside of lectures?

References Bennet, S., and Lockyer, L. (2004). Becoming an online teacher: Adapting to a changed environment for teaching and learning in higher education. Education Media International, 41(3), 231 – 244. Boyd, M.D. and Ellison, N.B. (2007). Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210 – 230. Bumgarner, B.A. (2007). You have been poked: exploring the uses and gratifications of Facebook among emerging adults. First Monday, 22(11). Retrieved 10 January 2013 from. http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/paper/viewPaper/2026/1897. Beebe, R., Vonderwell, L. S. and Boboc, M. (2010). Emerging patterns in transferring assessment practices from F2F to online environments. Electronic Journal of e‐Learning, 8(1):1‐12. Cassidy, J. (2006). Me media: how hanging out of the internet became big business. The New Yorker, 82(13), 50, Retrieved 3 January 2013 from http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/05/15/060515fa_fact_cassidy. Coffey, A., and Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data: Complementary research strategies. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Ellison, N.B., Steinfeld, C. and Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “Friends”: social capital and college students; use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143 – 1168. Foko, T. (2009).The use of mobile technologies in enhancing learning in South Africa and the challenges of increasing digital divide. In Siemens, G. & Fulford, C. eds. Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications. pp. 2535‐2540. Jacob, S.M. and Isaac, B. (2008). The Mobile Devices and its Mobile Learning Usage Analysis. Proceedings of the International Multi‐conference of Engineers and Computer Scientists. Hong Kong, pp. 19‐21. Junco, R. (2011). The relationship between frequency of Facebook use, participation in Facebook activities, and student engagement. Computers & Education, 58(2012), 162 – 171. Larue, E.M. (2012). Using Facebook as course management software: a case study. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 7(1):17‐22. Mason, R. (2006). ‘Learning technologies for adult continuing education’. Studies in Continuing Education, 28(2), 121 – 133. Mazer, J.P., Murphy, R.E. and Simonds, C.J. (2007). I’ll see you on “Facebook”: the effects of computer‐mediated teacher self‐disclosure on student motivation, affective learning, and classroom climate. Communication Education, 56(1), 1 – 17. Moran, M., Seaman, J. and Tinti‐kane, H. (2011). Teaching, learning, and sharing: How today’s higher education faculty use social media. Research report published by Pearson, The Babson Survery Research Group, and Converseon. Retrieved 22 May 2012 from http://www3.babson.edu/ESHIP/research‐ publications/upload/Teaching_Learning_and_Sharing.pdf. Naveh, G., Tubin, D. and Pliskin, N. (2010). Student LMS use and satisfaction in academic institutions: The organizational perspective. Internet and Higher Education, 13(3):127‐133. Oblinger, D.G., and Olinger, J.L. (2005). Is it age or IT: First steps toward understanding the net generation. In D.G. Oblinger and J.L. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the net generation. Boulder, Colorado: EDUCAUSE, 2.1 – 2.20. Ong, C.S., Lai, J.Y. and Wang, Y.S. (2004). Factor affecting engineer’s acceptance of asynchronous e‐learning systems in high‐tech companies. Informatics & Management, 41(6):795‐408. Ramirez, A. and Wang, Z. (2008). When online meets offline: An expectancy violations theory perspective on modality switching. Journal of Communications, 58(1):20‐39. Roblyer, M.D., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J. and Witty, J.V. (2010). Findings on Facebook in higher education: a comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(3), 134 – 140. Sandars, J. (2005). Work based learning: a social network perspective. Work Based Learning in Primary Care. 3(1):4‐12. S. Sjøberg, Constructivism and Learning, In: Editors‐in‐Chief: Penelope Peterson, Eva Baker and Barry McGaw, Editor(s)‐in‐ Chief, International Encyclopedia of Education (Third Edition), Elsevier, Oxford, 2010, Pages 485‐490, ISBN 9780080448947, 10.1016/B978‐0‐08‐044894‐7.00467‐X.STEYN, H. S. 2000. Practical significance of the difference in means. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 26(3):1‐3. Towner, T.L. and Vanhorn, A. M. (2007). Facebook: Classroom tool for a classroom community? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, [Online]. Available at: <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p197133_index.html>, Accessed: 20 January 2012.

478

Greek Secondary School Teachers' Perceptions Regarding ICT and Greek Literature/Language Olga Despi King’s College, UK idespis@yahoo.gr Abstract: Since the end of the last century, information communication technologies (hereafter ICT) has been introduced as a teaching tool throughout the curriculum of Greek public secondary schooling (Chatzisavidis & Alexiou 2012). Academic research, diachronically, points out that Greek language/literature teachers (hereafter G‐teachers) are rather conservative in adopting and using ICT innovations in teaching (Kontogianopoulou‐Polidoridi 1991; Jimoyannis & Komis 2006b; Goufas 2007; Plevris 2007). To this end, international surveys indicate that teachers’ positive or negative perceptions are key factors towards ICT adoption in the classroom (Kersaint et al. 2003; Albirini 2006; Hismanoglu 2012).This research study tries to explore and justify the overall G‐teachers’ perceptions of moving towards ICT integration in secondary public schooling. The research population addresses G‐teachers of secondary public schools in the Athens area as a representative population area for Greece. Both quantitative and qualitative primary research findings are critically discussed and evaluated in terms of descriptive statistics and cross‐case analysis. Primarily, it has been noted that G‐ teachers’ overall perception of ICT’s potential in teaching is positive and they are familiar/knowledgeable with ICT use mostly in their personal lives and, to a lesser degree, in classroom practice. The above may entail a rather antithetical situation: though G‐teachers’ overall perception of ICT’s potential is positive, this is not justified by actual ICT teaching practice. It is pointed out that G‐teachers’ reluctance to use ICT initiatives in teaching is mostly affected by exogenous prohibiting factors such as: lack of effective ongoing training, infrastructure inefficiencies as well as limitations deriving from the Greek centralised curriculum. In conclusion, from the findings it could be argued that, once the above mentioned exogenous prohibiting factors are solved, there are grounds to enhance opportunities for G‐teachers’ constructive use of ICT in their teaching. To this end, this study points out the need for further research and suggests, among others, a longitudinal survey every three years in order to measure changes in G‐teachers’ perceptions of implementing ICT initiatives in teaching, thus taking analogous reengineering steps in policy. Keywords: ICT integration, perceptions, Greek language/literature teachers

1. Introduction Following the global Internet expansion, issues referring to ICT have affected almost every aspect of human activity (Elliot & Melhuish 1995). Within the scope of education, academic discourse on ICT has gained a different magnitude, specifically on matters relating to the overall literacy and pedagogy context (Ofsted 2002). It is a fact that 21st‐century education is changing rapidly and the use of ICT in the teaching process is becoming more and more a dire need in order to catch students’ attention and involve them in the learning process (Gibson 2006). Presently, Greece is going through a hard time since the economy has crashed. Many things need to be done in order to get through this but first and foremost people’s mentality should change. In order for this to happen, education and especially the teaching–learning process should change so that students can start thinking critically and the use of ICT in the teaching process could lead towards this direction. Hence it would be interesting to investigate how and to what extent ICT has been integrated in the teaching process and in what ways G‐teachers perceive this integration. Overall, it should be interesting for the conference’s participants to identify what the prohibiting or facilitating factors are that could lead to a smooth ICT integration in schooling, thus shifting pedagogy from technology education to an integrated technological education. In the Greek setting, ICT emerged in education since the late 1980s as “Computer Science”, a separate module in secondary schools. In 1996 the Odysseia Project (1996–2001) was introduced with the aim of intergrading ICT in Greek secondary public schools (Odysseia 2002). This project, though successful in equipping public schools with ICT hardware, seems to have failed its goal at the pedagogical level in terms of integrating strategic usage of ICT in the teaching–learning process, thus remaining behind contemporary developments (Vosniadou & Kollias 2001). In between several relative but spasmodic attempts, a programme for teachers is being implemented in 2007–2013, aiming to train teachers on how to integrate ICT use in their specialty (Training Level B, n.d.). The most comprehensive effort by the Ministry of Education was started in 2011 in the context of "Digital School”, where a series of progressive actions were taken within the framework of “New

479

Olga Despi School” aiming at developing ICT initiatives in Greek primary and secondary schooling in order to enhance technological education versus technology education. The concept of technological education entails the integration of ICT not only as a separate module per se (technology education) but as an instruction tool incorporating the teaching–learning process in all curricula modules. Hence this is also applicable in Greek language/literature teaching which together with mathematics (“literacy and numeracy”) constitute the core modules taught throughout all grades of secondary education. However, G‐teachers according to academic research, seem to be rather reluctant to use ICT in their teaching (Jimoyannis & Komis 2006b; Plevris 2007) and somehow conservative in adopting innovations (Kontogianopoulou‐Polidoridi 1991; Goufas 2007). In support of the above, academia claims that teachers’ perceptions of ICT have a direct impact on whether or not they will integrate ICT into their teaching (Kersaint et al. 2003; Albirini 2006; Hismanoglu 2012).

2. The aim of the study The aim of this study is to explore and justify G‐teachers’ perceptions of moving towards ICT integration in the secondary schooling process. Based on their perceptions, an attempt will be made to identify possible reasons that make G‐teachers reluctant to adopt ICT initiatives.

3. Literature review International and national literature from both academia and practitioners was reviewed according to the following thematic areas:

4. The impact of teachers’ perceptions of ICT integration into the teaching–learning process In the last century, Fullan (1991) stated that “educational change depends on what teachers do and think – it’s as simple and as complex as that” (Fullan 1991: 117). Through time, academia and practitioners have asserted the above view, emphasising that teachers’ perceptions as well as their attitudes are key factors for change (Passel & Samways 1997; Leask & Pachler 1999; Pelgrum 2001; Kersaint et al. 2003; Gibson 2006; Hismanoglu 2012). Convincingly, Albirini (2006) points out that the development of teachers’ positive approach towards ICT “is a critical factor not only for enhancing computer integration in the teaching/learning process but also for avoiding teachers’ resistance to computer use” (Albirini 2006: 375).

5. Factors affecting teachers’ perceptions of ICT in education According to Gibson (2006), teachers’ “familiarity and knowledge” on ICT use in education mainly depends on their awareness regarding the impact of technology use for the improvement of their teaching. However, as regards to age, academia has not yet reached consensus on the relationship between teachers’ age and their ICT familiarity and use in the teaching process (Becta 2004; Rousos 2007). “Training” also constitutes a critical and complex factor affecting teachers’ perceptions as well as their attitudes towards ICT (Baylor & Ritchie 2002; Ferrero 2003; Jimoyannis & Komis 2007; Law 2009). It is a critical factor because it does not entail only technical knowledge of how to use ICT tools but also requires an awareness of ICT usefulness and potential in changing teaching practices. Furthermore, it is a complex factor because it encompasses both the teachers’ mind and feelings (ibid). In relation to “challenges and obstacles”, it is argued that the role of the teacher may become the decisive “challenge” towards incorporating ICT in education. Law (2009) argues that, today, teachers may see themselves not as knowledge‐conveying lecturers but as coordinators of new pedagogies and learning practices in cooperation with their students. Regarding the obstacles affecting teachers’ perceptions of ICT, these could be identified both on a material and technical level as well as on an immaterial one. According to Hew and Brush (2007), the former mainly refers to technology infrastructure and existing resources, while the latter entails knowledge, skills and, last but not least, the overall attitude and beliefs on the teacher’s part. Finally teachers’ computer “confidence and competence” are very important elements that will either make teachers use ICT in classroom or not (Lambert & Gong 2010; Santos & Pedro 2012). From the above discussion it may be argued that teachers’ “overall perceptions” of ICT in education could be evaluated in terms of an axis including different variables. No factor in isolation can be estimated as a stimulus or an obstacle of ICT integration.

480

Olga Despi

6. Surveys referring to secondary g‐teachers’ perceptions of ICT in education within the Greek environment According to surveys, although G‐teachers are willing to familiarise themselves with ICT use (Jimoyannis and Komis 2006a), they seem to be rather reluctant regarding integration of ICT into their teaching process (Kontogiannopoulou‐Polidoridi 1991; Jimoyannis & Komis 2006b; Plevris 2007). They also point out that, even when teachers use ICT in the classroom, usage is limited to low‐range applications such as text processing, calculations and work sheets or getting information from the Internet. In their study, Jimoyannis and Komis (2006a) report that only a limited number of teachers use ICT as a fundamental learning tool. Even though they seem willing to use ICT in order to improve their teaching, they actually adjust the use of ICT in their traditional teaching (Demetriadis et al. 2003). International academic research referring to Greece (Vosniadou 2002; Giakoumatou 2004b; Jimoyannis & Komis 2007; Plevris 2007) identifies the following factors inhibiting integration of ICT in Greek schools: (a) G‐teachers’ lack of confidence in using ICT initiatives due to limited training; (b) insufficient technical support both in hardware and software terms; (c) the amount of “burden” of material from the specified curriculum that has to be covered; (d) lack of technical support for using the computer lab; (e) lack of the appropriate educational software; and (f) inefficient funding. To make matters worse, hardware obsolescence constitutes another inhibiting factor.

7. The structure of the research study In order to accomplish the aim of the research, after setting the research questions, relative research objectives and dimensions will help to develop the research procedure and give answers to the research questions. Table 1: Depicts the research structure by aligning the research objectives, dimensions and questions: Research Objectives

Research Questions

Research Dimensions

To spot/approach differences – if any – of G‐teachers’ ICT use in their personal and professional life.

How familiar/knowledgeable are G‐ teachers with the use of ICT in their personal and professional life?

Dimension No 1: Degree of G‐teachers’ familiarity/knowledge with ICT in terms of personal/professional life.

To specify any positive/negative features that shape G‐teachers’ perceptions to this end. To demonstrate in what ways G‐ teachers’ positive/negative views on ICT use may affect the principles and essence of their teaching process.

How do G‐teachers perceive ICT potential with respect to the schooling and teaching process?

Dimension No 2: G‐teachers’ perceptions with respect to ICT potential in teaching.

To investigate G‐teachers’ perceptions of ICT integration in their teaching practice in relation to the strategic context of "New School”, enacted in 2011.

What factors either stimulate or prohibit G‐teachers’ experience of using ICT in the classroom?

Dimension No 3: G‐teachers’ use of ICT in classroom practice.

Source: Author The research procedure encompasses both quantitative and qualitative research and it was conducted in June 2012 in different public schools of Athens area. The research instruments (structured questionnaire and discussion guidelines) are based on the above aligned research structure.

481

Olga Despi

8. Quantitative research (procedure) The research data were collected using a snowball sampling method (57 respondents). According to Heckathorn (1997), it is one of three methods that dominate academic studies of the hidden population. A single type questionnaire of 28 questions was constructed according to the above research dimensions including closed and open‐ended questions as well as five‐point attitudinal scales to identify and quantify the degree of importance of perceptions and attitudes. A free online survey builder called “Kwiksurveys” (http://kwiksurveys.com) for creating questionnaires was used in order to secure confidentiality and anonymity, thus gathering credible results. Responses were returned anonymously.

9. Qualitative research (procedure) Qualitative research data were collected with in‐depth interviews through either Skype or telephone calls. This was conducted with the help of discussion guidelines. The interviewees – seven G‐teachers working in secondary education, five of who taught at a public gymnasium and two at a lyceum– volunteered to be interviewed and all codes of personal data protection was kept “confidential”. Participants are referred to with the initial of their surnames.

10. Highlights of quantitative research It is considered important to briefly mention some demographic data of the research participants. Findings show that G‐teachers: (a) belong by majority to the female sex (86%); (b) tend to be older, since approximately only 25% are between the ages of 25–40; and (c) have by majority only a bachelor’s degree (64%) with no post‐graduate education. Finally, in terms of experience, 73% of the sampling population had professional work practice of more than 10 years, which implies that G‐teachers are well experienced in class teaching. In terms of frequency of daily ICT use, graded on a five‐point scale, it was found that the majority of the sample (77%) used heavily, on a daily basis, either a conventional computer or a laptop. However, it is interesting to notice that 17% of the respondents did not use either a computer or a laptop on a daily basis. With respect to how G‐teachers gained knowledge/familiarity, research findings indicate that most of them (approximately 87%) were to a great extent self‐educated in the use of ICT. Only 28% received a formal academic technology education on the subject (see Appendix, graph N1). From the findings, it could be alleged that more than half of the sample has integrated the use of ICT into their personal life. On the contrary, only 5% of G‐teachers make everyday use of ICT in their classrooms (see Appendix, graph N4). There is also a vast minority of 23% that makes no use of ICT in the classroom. In accordance to what Vosniadou and Kollias (2001) and Plevris (2007) claim, one could argue that, even though G‐teachers use ICT greatly in their personal life, for some reason or other they do not seem to make analogous use of ICT in their classrooms. This could easily suggest that confidence is a factor, which may have a direct impact on making G‐teachers reluctant to use ICT in their classrooms (Becta 2004; Koutsogiannis 2007). With respect to training on the latest digital technology, it was deducted that the majority of respondents do not feel adequately trained. This may be the reason why they avoid using ICT systematically in their teaching (Kiridis et al. 2006; Giavrimis et al. 2011). It is worth mentioning that more than 50% of G‐teachers evaluate ICT teaching as a method to stimulate students’ interest and involvement in the lesson, without generating classroom confusion (see Appendix, graph N2). Finally, they also claim that ICT does not minimise the seriousness of schooling. Antithetically, they believe that ICT that supports teaching enhances a student‐centred learning process, leading to interaction and critical thinking (McCain 2005; Koutsogiannis 2007; Jimoyannis & Komis 2007). Furthermore, in the scope of Greek language/literature teaching with ICT versus traditional teaching, findings show that 61% of respondents feel that the integration of ICT complements the traditional teaching process but by no means can it substitute the role of the teacher (see Appendix, graph N3). This may imply that G‐teachers tend to believe that ICT is a value‐adding component in teaching Greek language/literature. Finally, age and professional specialty are considered critical factors influencing G‐teachers’ perceptions of ICT integration in teaching. However, though G‐teachers are willing to use ICT in their teaching their experience is found to be limited to this end.

11. Highlights of qualitative research findings within the following fields

G‐TEACHERS’ KNOWLEDGE/FAMILIARITY OF ICT

Findings of in‐depth interviews show that almost all interviewees use ICT in their daily activities as well as for social interaction purposes and entertainment. Nonetheless, what seems rather antithetical is that, although most interviewees are familiar with/knowledgeable of the use of ICT, they admit that they are not as heavy ICT

482

Olga Despi users in their classroom as in their personal life (Scrimshaw 2004; Jimoyannis & Komis 2006a; Jimoyannis & Komis 2007; Plevris 2007). Overall, G‐teachers’ degree of ICT literacy and familiarity/knowledge could be regarded as being quite satisfactory mainly as far as traditional ICT functions such as e‐mail, Internet, video projections, overheads and PowerPoint are concerned.

G‐TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF ICT’S POTENTIAL

Out of all interviewees’ responses it is apparent that G‐teachers are positively disposed to use ICT in teaching. Interviewees even note down advantages that ICT use could have for their lessons. Particularly, they acknowledge that the use of ICT could enrich the lesson at specific stages, capture children’s attention, help students learn how to collaborate and work in groups. However, they are also sceptical about the degree and nature of ICT use in teaching (Jimoyannis & Komis 2007). Unanimously it is argued that ICT should be used in moderation and that ICT could never replace the teacher (Goufas 2007; Koutsogiannis 2007). All in all, it could be alleged that G‐teachers’ overall perceptions of ICT’s potential in teaching is positive. However, they are found to be sceptical with respect to the effectiveness of policy makers’ strategy of implementing ICT integration into secondary education, specifically in terms of new curriculum design and inadequate training. These points correspond to findings of above mentioned quantitative research and are in accordance with relative literature review.

G‐TEACHERS’ USE OF ICT IN CLASSROOM PRACTICE

All interviewees refer to several problems preventing integration and educational use of ICT tools in their teaching process. Findings of the in‐depth interviews indicate that G‐teachers identify six main obstacles which hinder the integration of ICT in their teaching process: (1) poor infrastructure, extensively referred to as a critical problem; that is to say, inadequate hardware and software supply and dysfunctionalities in ICT access within the school environment; (2) lack of proper and constant training; (3) overloaded compulsory course material that does not provide them with the time needed and flexibility to experiment in ICT initiatives; (4) lack of motivation and assessment policy; (5) lack of students’ relative ICT literacy; and (6) ineffective and inefficient funding (Vosniadou 2002; Becta 2004; Giakoumatou 2004; Jimoyannis & Komis 2007; Koutsogiannis 2007; Plevris 2007).

12. Conclusions This research study tried to delineate G‐teachers’ positive or negative perceptions with respect to ICT integration into the teaching process. Critical analysis of findings of both quantitative and qualitative research identify a rather antithetical condition: on the one hand, it is apparent that G‐teachers have a positive perception of ICT integration in their teaching, while on the other hand they are rather reluctant, to a great extent, to use ICT in their classroom practice. Several prohibiting factors that may justify the above situation have been pointed out. These are found to be originating from both the out‐school and in‐school environment. Research respondents have identified dysfuctionalities such as ICT accessibility within the school environment, inadequate infrastructure in terms of hardware and software supply, lack of proper ongoing training, lack of motivation and assessment schedules, students’ somehow inefficient ICT literacy and, finally, overloaded course material and lack of funding (Vosniadou 2002; Becta 2004; Giakoumatou 2004; Plevris 2007). Overall, G‐teachers believe that the flexibility that ICT offers in teaching is eliminated in today’s reality of Greek secondary schools. This is due to the controls and restrictions of the national centralised curriculum and the poor ICT infrastructure in schools. This is said to be a discouraging cause mostly for those G‐teachers wishing to experiment with more innovative practices in the classroom. According to the findings, G‐teachers are quite familiar with and knowledgeable of ICT use in their personal life, but they do not seem to use ICT to the same extent in their classrooms. What is more, they seem to be familiar with more traditional ICT tools (computer/laptop) rather than more innovative/modern ones (interactive whiteboards, ipads). However, G‐teachers seem to be willing to experiment with pioneering ICT initiatives if given suitable opportunities, specifically in terms of effective training which they believe are of prime importance (Kynigos et al. 2000; Scrimshaw 2004; Santos & Pedro 2012). Nevertheless, findings show that subject‐matter training seminars of Level B, offered by the Institute of Education, targeting specifically the use of ICT in Greek language/literature teaching, have rather poor attendance (only 38% of respondents): this is another contradictory issue to be observed. Furthermore, the great majority of participants in this study report that the national training programmes they have attended target more technical issues rather than setting the background for a change on pedagogical aspects. In a way, this may also explain their persistence to use more traditional teaching methods and values due to partial awareness of the ground‐breaking

483

Olga Despi potential of ICT and its revolutionary contribution to teaching. This is in line with current academic discourse on the issue (Becta 2004). Becta (2004) stresses that a sustainable training policy, aiming to build a positive platform for ICT adoption by the teachers, should be based not so much on the technical proficiency ICT may offer but mainly on how ICT can change pedagogy. The majority of respondents believe that the most beneficial impact of ICT in the classroom is apparent in its auxiliary role for supporting and enriching traditional teaching practices rather than on playing a fundamental role in terms of changing the whole pedagogy. G‐ teachers strongly believe that “by no means, can ICT replace the teacher or his/her role”. This is also justified by diachronic research surveys, according to which G‐teachers are rather conservative in experimenting with innovating pedagogies and ICT use (Kontogianopoulou‐Polidoridi 1991; Jimoyannis & Komis 2006a; Jimoyannis & Komis 2006b; Goufas 2007). To this end, Pachler (1999) and Gibson (2006) claim that, no matter to what degree ICT is implemented in the teaching process, the role of the teacher, though changing, remains predominant. On the whole, it could be said that the data analysis of this study identifies G‐teachers’ overall positive perception of moving towards ICT integration in their teaching. With respect to the overall potential of ICT in teaching, the majority of G‐teachers believe that ICT constructively helps the teaching–learning process; to this end, it is interesting to note that no significant negative aspects are identified, with the exemption of the notion that ICT in extreme cases may create classroom confusion. Also, G‐teachers believe that the new curriculum enacted in 2011 is moving in the right direction towards ICT integration in schooling, under condition that institutional problems are solved (OECD 2011). However, it should be stressed that discussion of these findings and critical analysis seem to address a rather controversial issue, because findings indicate antiphatic aspects among G‐teachers’ perceptions (what they believe), intentions (what they would like to do) and real actions (what they do). This situation could be partially explained by the fact that identified obstacles beyond G‐teachers’ control, as mentioned above, may trade off their positive perceptions of ICT integration in their teaching. This study, though limited in space, may shed light on some aspects that may impede their willingness to integrate ICT in class practice with the intention of constituting a background for further research to investigate the gaps between their perceptions and classroom practice, thus enhancing reengineering pedagogy.

13. Implications and suggestions for further research According to the findings, it is implied that G‐teachers’ positive perceptions of moving towards ICT integration in their teaching could be further strengthened by giving solutions to several factors that prohibit their involvement with ICT usage in classroom practice. In addition, it is implied that their professional ICT familiarisation procedure may need more time in terms of training and practical exposure in order to make them realise the full potential of ICT initiatives. It is also implied that exogenous barriers (such as training, infrastructure, curriculum) that mostly refrain G‐teachers’ positive perceptions and make them reluctant to use ICT in their teaching could be addressed through a set of flexible reform proposals corresponding to the actual needs and circumstances pertaining to secondary public schooling. This may necessitate change or supplementation not only within the new curriculum background but also on the whole approach and planning towards education. The “New School” framework, enacted in 2011, addresses the issue of ICT as a fundamental tool throughout the curriculum and provides a set of measures that eliminate prohibiting factors to this end. It is thought necessary for the new provisions to encompass G‐teachers as a basic target group in policy formation. In this respect, it could be helpful to measure changes in G‐teachers’ perceptions in terms of a longitudinal survey every three years in order to take analogous reengineering steps in policy.

14. Limitations This study is of an academic nature and it was conducted for the needs of an MA dissertation for King’s College London.

Appendix 1 Due to space limitations, the following tables are presented only as selectively depicting the quantitative research findings in accordance to the research dimensions aligned in table 1.

484

Olga Despi Graph N1 (familiarity/knowledge) Please, grade the following regarding how you gained your ICT knowledge/familiarity? (5 = very much, 4 = very, 3 = enough, 2 = little, 1 = very little)

Other (please, specify and the frequency of daily use)

1 answer: Training by the Ministry of Education

Graph N2 (perceptions on the impact of ICT in teaching) In what ways do you think that ICT supporting teaching affects the overall learning process?

Graph N3 (perceptions on ICT role in teaching) How would you characterise the overall ICT integration/use in Greek language/literature teaching?

485

Olga Despi Graph N4 (degree of ICT use in the classroom) How often do you use ICT in the classroom?

References Albirini, A. (2006) “Teachers’ Attitudes Toward Information and Communication Technologies: The Case of Syrian EFL Teachers”, Computers & Education, Vol 47, No. (4), pp 373–398. Baylor, A. and Ritchie, D. (2002) “What Factors Facilitate Teacher Skill, Teacher Morale, and Perceived Student Learning in Technology‐Using Classrooms?”, Computers & Education, Vol 39, No. 4, pp 395–414. Becta (2004) A Review of the Research Literature on Barriers to the Uptake of ICT by Teachers. Becta. [Online] http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/1603/1/becta_2004_barrierstouptake_litrev.pdf. Chatzisavidis, S. and Alexiou, M. (2012) “ICT in Greek Education: Quick Overview”, in P3.1.3 Methodology and Development Processes of Educational Scenarios in Language/Literature courses at Primary Education. Thessaloniki: Centre of Greek Language, pp 25–28. Demetriadis, S., Barbas, A., Molohides, A., Palaigeorgiou, G., Psillos, D., Vlahavas, I., Tsoukalas, I. and Pombortsis, A. (2003) “Cultures in Negotiation: Teachers' Acceptance/Resistance Attitudes Considering the Infusion of Technology into Schools”, Computers & Education, Vol 41, No. 1, pp 19–37. Elliot, S. and Melhuish, P. (1995) “A Methodology for the Evaluation of IT for Strategic Implementation”, Journal of Information Technology, Vol 10, No. 2, pp 87–100. Ferrero, S. (2003) “Two Generations of Teachers. Differences in Attitudes Towards ICT”. [Online] http://www.elearningeuropa.info/pt/node/2106. Fullan, M. (1991) The New Meaning of Educational Change, Cassell, London. Giakoumatou, T. (2004) When IT Met Language/Literature. What We Know 5 Years After, Thessaloniki. [Online] http://www.netschoolbook.gr/epimorfosi/conferences/s12_5years_Thess_2004.pdf. Giavrimis, P., Giossi, S. and Papastamatis, A. (2011) “Teachers' Attitudes Towards Training in ICT: A Critical Approach”, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol 19, No. 3, pp 283–296. Gibson, I. (2006) “At the Intersection of Technology and Pedagogy: Considering Styles of Learning and Teaching”, Information Technology for Teacher, Vol 10, No. (1–2), pp 37–61. Goufas, K. (2007) ICT and Language/Literature Teachers: Attitudes, Perceptions and Needs. [Online] http://www.epyna.eu/agialama/synedrio_syros_4/filologoi/207_Goufa.pdf. Heckathorn, D. (1997) “Respondent‐Driven Sampling: A New Approach to the Study of Hidden Populations.” Social Problems, Vol 44, No. 2, pp. 174‐199. Hew, K. F. and Brush, T. (2007) “Integrating Technology into K‐12 Teaching and Learning: Current Knowledge Gaps and Recommendations for Future Research”, Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol 55, pp 223–252. Hismanoglu, M. (2012) “The Impact of a Curricular Innovation on Prospective EFL Teachers' Attitudes Towards ICT Integration into Language Instruction”, International Journal of Instruction, Vol 5, No. 1, pp 183–202. Jimoyannis, A. and Komis, V. (2006a) Factors Affecting Teacher's Views and Perceptions of ICT in Education, IADIS International Conference e‐Society, Dublin, pp. 136‐143. Jimoyannis, A. and Komis, V. (2006b) ICT in Education: Exploring Secondary School Teachers' Perceptions, Greek Scientific Association of Information and Communications Technologies in Education, Thessaloniki. Jimoyannis, A. and Komis, V. (2007) “Examining Teachers' Beliefs about ICT in Education: Implications of a Teacher Preparation Programme”, Teacher Development: An International Journal of Teachers' Professional Development, Vol 11, No. 2, pp 149–173. Kersaint, G., Horton, B., Stohl, H. and Garofalo, J. (2003) “Technology Beliefs and Practices of Mathematics Education Faculty”, Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, Vol 11, No. 4, pp 549–577. Kiridis, A., Drossos, V. and Tsakiridou, H. (2006) “Teachers Facing Information and Communication Technology (ICT): The Case of Greece”, Journal of Technology and Teacher education, Vol 14, No. 1, pp 75–96.

486

Olga Despi Kontogiannopoulou‐Polidoridi, G. (1991) “The Educational and Social Dimensions of the Use of New Technologies in Education”, Contemporary Issues, Vol 46–47, pp 77–93. Koutsogiannis, D. (2007) The Utilization of ICT in the Teaching of Language/literature and Especially in Teaching the Greek Language. Research Mainly on Language/literature Teachers That Were Trained Under the Odysseia Project, Center of Greek Language, Thessaloniki. Kynigos, P., Karageorgos, D., Vavouraki, A. and Gavrilis, K. (2000) “The Opinions of the Teachers of "Odysseas" Relative to the Use of New Technologies in Education”, in Proceedings of the 2nd Panhellenic Conference 'Information and Communication Technologies in Education’. Lambert, J. and Gong, Y. (2010) “21st Century Paradigms for Pre‐Service Teacher Technology Preparation”, Computers in the Schools, Vol 27, No. 1, pp 54–70. Law, N. (2009) “Mathematics and Science Teachers’ Pedagogical”, Education and Information Technologies, Vol 14, pp 309– 323. Leask, M. and Pachler, N. (1999) Learning to Teach Using Ict in the Secondary School, Routledge, London. McCain, T. (2005) Teaching for Tomorrow: Teaching Content and Problem‐solving Skills, California: Corwin Press. Odysseia (2002) Odysseia Project. [Online] http://odysseia.cti.gr. OECD (2011) Education Policy Advice for Greece, Strong Performers and Successful Reforms in Education, OECD Publishing [Online] http://www.oecd.org/greece/48407731.pdf. OfSTED (2002) Office for Standards in Education ICT in Schools: Effects of Goverment Initatives: Implementation in Primary Schools and Effect on Literacy, OfSTED, London Pachler, N. (1999) “Theories of Learning and ICT”, in: M. Leask and N. Pachler, eds. Learning to Teach Using Ict in the Secondary School, Routledge, London, pp 3–18. Passel, D. and Samways, B. (1997) Information Technology Supporting Change Through Teacher Education. Chapman & Hall, London. Pelgrum, W. (2001) “Obstacles to the Integration of ICT in Education: Results from a Worldwide Educational Assessment2, Computers and Education, Vol 37, pp 163–178. Plevris, G. (2007) Language Courses, Teaching Practice and ICT. Languahe/Literature Teachers "Metexetasteoi" at ICT. [Online] http://ipeir.pde.sch.gr/educonf/2/11NeesTehnologies/plevris/plevris.pdf. Rousos, P. (2007) “The Greek Computer Attitude Scale: Construction and Assessment of Psychometric Properties”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol 23, No. 1, pp 578–590. Santos, A. and Pedro, N. (2012) The Relationship Between Teachers' Training,Personal sence of Efficacy and ICT Integration: Analysing its Strength and Stability, International Conference on Information Communication Technologies in Education (ICICTE). [Online] http://www.icicte.org/Proceedings2012/Papers/08‐5‐Santos.pdf. Scrimshaw, P. (2004) Enabling Teachers to Make Successful Use of ICT, British Educational Communications and Technology Agency (Becta), Coventry. Training Level B. (n.d.) Training Level B: For the Exploitation and Application of ICT in the Classroom. [Online] http://b‐ epipedo2.cti.gr/project‐m/about‐project‐bepipedo‐m.html. Vosniadou, S. (2002) ICT in Education: Perspectives, Obstacles and Suggestions. Greek Scientific Association of Information and Communications Technologies in Education, Rodos. Vosniadou, S. and Kollias, V. (2001) Information and Communication Technology and the Problem of Teacher. [Online]http://www.cs.phs.uoa.gr/en/staff/60.ICT%20and%20teacher%20training.pdf.

487

E‐Learning Tools for Public Awareness Programme Education in Disaster Risk Management: Case Study of the City of Cape Town Disaster Risk Management Centre Martha Kabaka and Juliet Stoltenkamp Centre for Innovative Educational and Communication Technologies (CIECT), University of the Western Cape, Bellville, Cape Town, South Africa martha.kabaka@gmail.com jstoltenkamp@uwc.ac.za Abstract‐ Disaster occurrence around the world has in the past few decades increased at an alarming rate necessitating an urgent need for mitigation strategies. As a result, research has indicated the usefulness of Information Communication Technology (ICT) in disaster risk management. Furthermore, ICT generally plays a critical role in all aspects of disaster risk management such as: early warning prediction; informing and circulating information relating to disasters to communities especially those at risk as promptly as possible and providing communication structures immediately after a disaster occurrence. As part of its planning and precautionary measures in responding to disasters, the City of Cape Town Disaster Risk Management Centre (CoCTDRMC) implements public awareness programmes across the city. The most acclaimed is an annual awareness programme especially for high school learners selected from various schools across the city. The learner participants are expected to act as change agents in their communities. In 2012, learners from twelve different schools across the city benefited from this programme. They were expected to educate families, friends, schoolmates and communities generally on the topical issues surrounding disaster risk management. This study uses a case study approach. Since the target audience of the programme is the youth, there is need to shift towards utilising ICT. The aim of this paper is to look at how e‐learning as an ICT tool can be integrated in the implementation of Public Awareness Education Programme (PAEP), so as to target broader audience and create an increased capacity building across the City of Cape Town (CoCT). The examination considers providing tools that are accessible, dependable, resilient and flexible among the residents so as to reach the grassroots levels where communities are mostly affected. The paper considers a combination of tools so as to support behavioural change. Some of the research findings are that, the 2012 programme was very beneficial and successful. Henceforth there is need to target a broader audience, and although the CoCTDRMC does make use of some relevant ICTs, there is need for additional and upgraded technological resources. Also pertinent is the fact that e‐learning can play a major role in making sure that a broader audience is reached if applied effectively. The findings of the research are of relevance to the CoCTDRMC and other municipalities across South Africa. The Centre for Innovative Educational and Communication Technologies (CIECT) at the University of the Western Cape can also use these findings to develop and implement an e‐learning course for both employees of CoCTDRMC and other interested community members. This will guide them on how e‐learning can assist in fostering a successful implementation of PAEP across the city. Keywords: e‐learning, disaster, disaster risk management, information communication technology, public awareness education programme

1. Background The severities of disasters in the recent years have proven beyond reasonable doubt that, the governments and other policy‐makers across the globe need to do more. This has called for more ways of making sure that, communities and properties are prevented from destruction or death. One of the major ways has been to work towards ensuring that communities are resilient, by especially informing them on disaster related matters. ICT has been defined as a major role player in such efforts, as it facilitates positive change across all levels. The thrust of this paper is to discuss how e‐learning as an ICT tool can be integrated by the CoCTDRM in its PAED so as to reach many people. Tools such as mobile devices, radio and social media (facebook, blogs, twitter) are widely available at grassroots levels, therefore the research emphasises that if these tools are properly utilised they can generate a major difference.

2. Literature review A literature review can be simply understood ‘‘as a description of the relevant literature on a particular field or topic’’ as defined by University of Canberra (2006). Kennedy (2007) indicates that literature review is globally accepted as a field of scholarly writing though it is still not clear what constitutes a body of literature. He further relates this argument to the fact that, it’s the writer who has the responsibility of determining what to include or exclude in the content. The topics used for this review were; e‐learning, disaster, Disaster Risk Management and Information Communication Technology (ICT).

488

Martha Kabaka and Juliet Stoltenkamp

2.1 Defining e‐learning Research shows that, the concept e‐learning can be understood differently by different people and this can be determined by particular professional approaches or interests. Some researchers argue that e‐learning can be viewed as a natural advancement of distance learning that aims at making use of new technologies in education, or also a new generation of distance education (Sangra, Vlachopoulos, and Cabrera 2012:146; Herridge Group 2003). Stockley (2012) in his blog supports the definition of e‐learning above by saying that, as a concept e‐learning can be defined differently by different people. He further defines e‐learning as the “delivery of a learning, training or education program by electronic means’’. Such may include computers or electronic devices (e.g. a mobile phone) in some way to provide training, educational or learning material. The researcher notes that, e‐learning tools go beyond using computers to include MP3 players, podcasts, blogs, online social networks, blogging and downloading music and video, daily or weekly blog, e‐mail or text messages, online forums or visiting a private chat room, USB flash drive, videos or presentation of assignments. In relation to this research, such tools can play major part in increasing community engagement towards increasing societal resilience in public awareness education. Authors with similar views include; Fry (2001), who views e‐learning as, “delivery of training and education via networked interactivity, and a range of other knowledge collection and distribution technologies”. Additionally, Herridge Group (2003), views e‐ learning as the use of internet or wireless technologies with an aim of improving knowledge, and performance where need be. As a result for e‐learning to be successful, it needs be implemented carefully so as to avoid failed projects as it’s a means to an end. From the above views, the researcher cannot fail to identify that, in the process of different authors trying to look for different understanding of e‐learning; the most outstanding concept within e‐learning is the term technology and transfer of knowledge. During e‐learning implementation, learners or participants can either experience learning at the same time (synchronous) or at different times (asynchronous). This creates more strength compared to when it happens at different levels. This then bring us to some of the benefits of e‐learning: the content is always available and reliable (learners can finalise at their own convenient time); learners are put at a control level; one may not need to travel far especially if they have access to internet and computers at home/school hence reducing travel costs to attend learning lectures; consistency of content (quality or effectiveness) as same learning is made available to anyone, anywhere at any time; e‐learning serves large number of people who might be at different parts simultaneously (Herridge Group 2003). Compared to traditional ways of content delivery, e‐learning becomes cost effective as it’s readily available in digital format. This cuts down printing material which consequently is a positive impact on the environment. When linked to ‘’broadening of learning context and learners’ communities’’, it results in tolerance and acceptance for groups at risk of social segregation (Herridge Group (2003; HELIOS 2007:4). This implies that communities that have limited number of schools can also rely on e‐learning to avoid travelling long distances. Wong (2007) points out that, many people pay more attention to benefits of e‐learning and not its disadvantages. He further provides some limitations of e‐learning as those that relate to technologies, personal issues, comparison with traditional campus learning and design issues among others (Wong 2007). Evan & Hasse (2001) states that e‐learning needs one to have computer skills therefore, limited to those who have skills. This limitation means there may be unexpected incurred training costs. A high level of discipline is required as the learners are expected to be self‐directed. Another major challenge is the availability of bandwidth and necessary resources. There is also a lack of face to face integration which may limit the sharing of ideas. Wong (2007) indicates that such limitations can be considered so as to avoid the failure of projects.

2.2 Disaster, disaster risk management and information communication technology (ICT) 2.2.1 Concept disasters Disasters can be described as any occurrence of activities that pose serious threats to the health of communities by disrupting the normal way of lives or even causing casualties (Eyre., Fertel., Fisher. & Gunn 2001; United Nations 2004). Davis & Seitz (1982:547) defined disasters as extraordinary physical events that attain human significance through the socio‐political contexts in which they occur. In addition, there is always a need to note that what exceeds the coping capabilities of one society may be commensurate with those of another and, hence, that physically similar occurrences may exhibit widely different effects from place to place (Davis & Seitz 1982). Statistics, for example show that in the year 2011, 332 natural disasters were recorded compared to the average annual disaster frequency observed from 2001 to 2010 which totaled 384.On the

489

Martha Kabaka and Juliet Stoltenkamp other hand; the implications in the year 2011 on both human and the economy were enormous. Death rate was approximately 30, 773 on people and caused 244.7 million victims worldwide. On the economic side, damages from natural disasters were the highest ever registered, with an estimated US$ 366.1 billion (Guha‐ Sapir., Vos., Below & Ponserre 2011). Such statistics are extremely frightening and it can generally be argued that, the occurrence of disasters around the world has in the past few decades increased at an alarming rate. It is without doubt that this has necessitated an urgent need for mitigation strategies. 2.2.2 Disaster risk management Disaster Risk Management according to Himayatulla and Abuturab (2008:5; UNDP 2007) is viewed as the sum total of all activities, programmes and measures which can be taken up before, during and after a disaster in order to reduce impact or recovering from its losses. Accordingly, there are always efforts towards minimising negative effects that can be caused by disasters such as proper planning; mitigation and impromptu actions. The three key stages of activities that are taken up within disaster risk management are; pre‐disaster activities; mitigation and preparedness activities, emergency response activities and lastly response and recovery activities. Himayatulla and Abuturab (2008) noted that pre‐disaster activities are those which are undertaken to reduce human and property losses caused by a potential hazard. For example, carrying out awareness campaigns, strengthening the existing weak structures, and preparing disaster management plans at household and community level. Such risk‐reduction measures taken at this stage are termed mitigation and preparedness activities. During a disaster, these include initiatives taken to ensure that the needs and provisions of victims are met and suffering is minimised. Activities taken at this stage are called emergency response activities. Post‐disaster activities refer to initiatives taken immediately after a disaster strikes, and in response to a disaster, with the purpose of achieving early recovery and rehabilitation of affected communities. These are referred to as response and recovery activities. Such activities link with each other and therefore the application of ICT becomes very relevant across all levels of disaster risk management. 2.2.3 Information communication technologies (ICT) roles in disaster risk management The role of ICT in Disaster Risk Management (DRM) cannot be questioned and is not a new area of discussion. Disaster Risk Management activities are largely driven by risk information and such information is always relevant (Sabat Undated; EUMETSA 2009). This argument is supported by organisations such as InfoDev (2009), which points out that there is a relevant body of research on the value of ICT application in DRM. On the other hand, such recognition of ICT and its application in DRM has not been possible in some countries due to certain challenges. For example, research has indicated that one challenge is the failure of some governments to implement ICT friendly policies, which in turn slows efforts towards disaster risk reduction (UN‐APCICT/ESCAP 2011). Other reasons include limited resources and high cost of equipment (example in Africa). At local levels, Simons,Vahed and Moodeley (2009) specifies that, in South Africa one of the disaster reduction challenges has been the dependence on outdated ICTs. Therefore, the discussed issues may imply that successful utilisation of any ICT tools in disaster risk management (as discussed below) is generally measured against its effectiveness and advancement. ICTs in mitigation promote collection and analysis of data, as well as the development of risk information products. These products include: risk zones maps; site selection for infrastructure and mitigation plans. In cases of advanced ICTs these products can also play a role in managing and mitigating disasters by supporting data collection during decision making, as well as during communication and collaboration. Such advancement is in the form of Internet, GIS, Remote Sensing, and Space Technology; and also reduces the challenge of ineffective management of technology in disaster risk management (Sagun 2010). In addition, ICTs in disaster preparedness supports data collection on different information. This is done through television and radio broadcasting, web portals, long‐distance education and telecommunications creating disaster mitigation (UN‐ APCICT/ESCAP 2010); Munodawafa J 2008). ICTs in disaster response and relief operations provide a simple information system to those individuals in charge of response (and other relevant agencies and professionals). Hence, ensuring relevant information is collected and communicated effectively to the public. Therefore, the right ICT infrastructure must be in place (UN‐APCICT/ESCAP 2011; (Laughton Undated). Such tools may include; amateur radios (VHF, UHF, HF), fixed lines using wireless, satellite telephones, fax and Internet/emails (Nelson 2009). Besides, the main role of

490

Martha Kabaka and Juliet Stoltenkamp recovery and reconstruction is to improve services for the affected communities. This is achieved by ensuring that there is minimal confusion and an increased collaboration between response agencies and those affected. The table below provides an example of some of the ICTs that have been applied in Asia and the Pacific in Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) efforts. ICTs tools applicable in Disaster Risk Management ICT Application Cell Broadcasting

GIS and Remote Sensing

Internet/Email

Mobile Phone (Text SMS)

Radio

Satellite Communications

Telephone

Television

Benefits Not affected by traffic load. Will not add to congestion. Messages can be differentiated by cells or sets of cells. Greater authenticity of message. Needs constant monitoring. Spatial presentation of data. Facilitates cooperative effort. Interactive. Multiple sources can be checked for accuracy of information. High penetration rate. Easy to carry. Relatively low cost.

One‐to‐many broadcasting. Does not require user to be literate and is Portable. Independent of terrestrial communication network that can be damaged by natural hazards. Does not require user to be literate.

One‐to‐many broadcasting. Does not require user to be literate.

Limitations Reader must be literate. Phone must be switched on. Phone must be set to receive cell broadcasting.

High bandwidth needed. High‐speed networks required. Costly hardware and software Demands skilled professionals. Difficulty capturing qualitative data. Low penetration rate. Must be literate. Internet content in local languages may be limited Must be literate. No indication that message is generated by a legitimate authority. Subject to congestion and thereby delay. Less effective at night. One must own one

High cost of systems hardware and bandwidth utilization. Unlikely to work indoors.

Inadequate penetration rates. Congestion of phone lines during emergencies. Disasters can damage infrastructure. Less effective at night. One needs to have access to one

Figure: 1: The advantages and disadvantages of selected ICT applications (UN‐APCICT/ESCAP 2010:22‐23) The above tools may vary at their degree of effectiveness in different parts of the world. This will be determined by certain infrastructures that are in place and seriousness of those in charge. For example radio transmitters and mobile networks must be working effectively.

3. Methodology A case‐study approach was adopted. A case study, according to Yin (1984:23), is defined as empirical research that examines a contemporary phenomenon within its real‐life context. In addition, the case study method is an approach to studying a social phenomenon through a thorough analysis of an individual case. Past case‐ studies provide researchers with an opportunity to explore and understand complex issues (Zainal 2007). Kothari (2004) explained that the case study method is a form of qualitative analysis where careful and complete observation of an individual or a situation; or an institution is done.

491

Martha Kabaka and Juliet Stoltenkamp The City of Cape Town Disaster Risk Management Centre has been chosen for the case study through which to expound the issue. The DRMC was chosen for several reasons. Firstly, the city faces an influx of people migrating from different provinces as well as from other African countries, leading to the growth of wide‐ spread informal settlements, which are more vulnerable to disasters. Recently in 2011, Cape Town was the only city in South Africa to be granted, “Role Model City” status (Pillay 2011). Despite this recognition, Cape Town is disaster prone, with several disasters ravaging throughout each year, making it a suitable case study area. This case study relied on both literature review and qualitative methods. These included online journals, blogs and discussion forums. In addition, 105 closed‐ended questionnaires were distributed to high school learners who took part in the Public Awareness Education Programme in the year 2012. Ninety‐two (92) learners completed the questionnaire. A total of 10 open‐ended questionnaires were distributed to the top management of the CoCTDRMC. Within the questionnaire, there was a question on the implementation of ICT in the DRMC. Furthermore, the researcher distributed 10 open‐ended questionnaires to the volunteer coordinators who work at DRMC. This group of people operates on the ground (within communities); hence their participation in the research was crucial.

4. Research findings Public awareness is aimed at ensuring that communities are aware of hazards around them. This enables them to stay resilient, by enlightening them on possible measures of saving their own communities from disaster‐ related occurrences (Hays 2012). Public awareness efforts, if effectively implemented, may assume different forms such as: national public awareness initiatives; special events and major activities; the role of the media; and the experiences of local communities (United Nations 2004:282). Both legislatives, namely, the South Africa’s Disaster Risk Management Act 52 of 2002 and the South African National Disaster Management Framework (NDMF) 2005, call for “a culture of risk avoidance among stakeholders by capacitating all role players through integrated education, training and public awareness education supported by scientific research” (South Africa 2002; South Africa 2005:83). This gives an indication that the policy framework takes into consideration the critical role played by implementing effective public awareness education campaigns in creating community resilience. In 2012, a Public Awareness Programme was implemented by both the DRMC and the Environmental Management Department of the City of Cape Town. This targeted 12 high schools, with12 learners from each school. The theme was, “Making cities resilient’’. The researcher asked the respondents to rate the usefulness of the project. Ninety‐nine (99%) felt that the programme was beneficial as it was new information gained. Some of the comments were: “fun but also educative’’; “the workshop was excellent’’; “have gained skills and knowledge on how to help my community and family when floods and fires strike”. The posed question was intended to find out if the programme was relevant to learners who represented their schools and communities. The majority felt that, due to the programme’s benefits, there was a need to expand to all schools across the City of Cape Town. The learners were asked if they made use of ICT tools during the workshop. They indicated that, they were only exposed to technology through research on the specific themes within their communities. As a result, the majority indicated usage of personal cell‐phones and internet cafés, while a very small number (20%) indicated that they made use of home internet connection. Learners were also asked whether they had internet connected computer labs at their schools. More than 52% of the learners indicated that they did not have internet connected computer labs at the time this research was conducted. Based on the researcher’s observation and geographical location of the schools, the schools without internet connected computer labs were those described as poorly resourced; and are located within poorer communities. The availability of internet connected computer labs would make e‐learning interventions implementable. The pie chart below represents internet connectivity at schools that were represented by participant learners in this research.

492

Martha Kabaka and Juliet Stoltenkamp

Internet Connectivity

Internet connectivity

48% 52%

No internet connectivity

Figure: 2. Internet connectivity pie chart The researcher, through informal interviews and observations found out that, 65% of the respondents had internet access via mobile‐phones which is relevant to the implementation of e‐learning. The figure below provides this information.

Internet access via mobile‐ phones 80 60

percentages

40 20 0 Internet accessibility

No internet accessibilty

Figure: 3. Internet access via mobile‐phones As indicated earlier, 10 open‐ended questionnaires were also distributed to the top management. One of the questions was to enquire if ICT was currently being used at the Disaster Risk Management Centre Department for public communication. The main forms of communication were: strong partnership with radio (FM) stations; and print media. Other forms mentioned include, community newspapers; fixed and cellular phones; short message services (sms); emails, internet (facebook and twitter). Flyers are also distributed to vulnerable communities and the City of Cape Town website is kept updated (YouTube videos). The researcher also requested that the management comment on the availability of technological resources. The respondents indicated that even though the available equipment and technology was effective, it needed a major upgrade and maintenance. For example, the researcher, during a tour at the DRMC also learned from the employees that there were too few screen monitors available for surveillance activities. Furthermore, another group of respondents (95%), volunteer coordinators, indicated that there was a need to upgrade the provision of ICT. The majority indicated that they needed to be provided with personal laptops and internet connection. This would enable them to update what is happening on the ground as they are mostly the first ones to report disaster occurrences. Hence, they pointed out the occurrence of many delays, as they were expected to travel to relevant Service Delivery Areas or the Head Office in order to access computers. Following, they indicated the need for more advanced capacity building programmes. Lastly, respondents were requested to comment on the improvement of the programme. A need was expressed for an increased number of workshops, possibly more than six. A suggestion was also made regarding the need for alerts via mobile phones to target the entire community. As most community members

493

Martha Kabaka and Juliet Stoltenkamp owned cell phones, sms bulk information could be sent from the DRMC. Some schools in CoCT who do have access to internet can be encouraged to distribute alerts to the school community, and communities around them via learners.

5. Recommendations It is generally accepted that there is need to find ways in which disaster‐ related death and destruction of property can be prevented or minimised. One would ask; what went wrong on New Year's morning when 5 people died and 4,000 people were left homeless when a devastating fire broke out in BM Section of Khayelitsha, Cape Town? There is need for the City of Cape Town to devise ways to reach many people through its Public Awareness Education Programme. A more serious partnership should be established with service providers, namely, Vodafone, MTN, Telecom and others in order to develop a comprehensive data base with cell phone numbers and physical addresses for its residents. When this is available, bulky early warning messages can be sent to residents so as to warn them before a disaster occurs. This may also include a voice recorded link. Many Capetonians own smart phones and the city could utilise social networking services like mixit, whattsapp (free instant messaging applications), face book and twitter to alert residents. There can be an arrangement whereby a message is send directly to those who have such accounts. All languages commonly spoken in Cape Town also need to be considered when communicating messages. The Centre of Innovative Educational and Communication Technologies (CIECT) at the University of the Western Cape should work in collaboration with municipalities, and other policy‐makers, to come up with an e‐learning Course on disaster risk resilience, to directly train practitioners and the public on disaster management. This can be integrated within the eCentre manager training project that has been on‐going since 2010. Furthermore, DRMC has reliable internet connection which would make implementation of e‐learning course easy for its employees. “One of the chief benefits of developing the e‐learning courses is the potential for ease of reuse and adaptation of e‐learning content” (IFRC, 2011:46).

6. Conclusion This paper demonstrated how e‐learning as an ICT tool is relevant for the implementation of Public Awareness Education in the CoCTDRMC. Consequently need for its implementation is imperative to foster targeting of many residents which eventually will save lives and property.

Acknowledgements Authors are grateful to the employees of the City of Cape Town Disaster Risk Management Centre for allowing this research to be conducted. Our sincere gratitude, to all the learners who responded to the questionnaires.

References Davis, M. and Seitz, S. (1982) Disasters and governments, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol 26, pp 547‐568. Evans, J.R. and Haase, I.M. (2001) ‘Online business education in the twenty‐first century: an analysis of potential target markets’, Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications Policy, Vol.11, No.3, pp.246‐260. Eyre, A., Fertel, N., Fisher, J. M. and & Gunn, S. W. (2001) Disaster coordination and management: Summary and action plans, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, Vol 16, No.1, pp 22‐25. Fry, K. (2001) "E‐learning markets and providers: some issues and prospects", Education + Training, Vol.43, No.4, pp 233 – 239. Guha‐Sapir,D., Vos,F., Below.R and Ponserre,S. (2011) Annual Disaster Statistical Review 2011. The numbers and trends, [online], http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/2012.07.05.ADSR_2011.pdf. Hays, W. (1012) How to put a new face on global disaster resilience. Global Alliance for Disaster Reduction, University of North Carolina, USA, [Online], www.pitt.edu/~super7/47011‐48001/47111. HELIOS. (2007) e‐Learning for Innovation, [online], http://www.menon.org/publications/HELIOS%20thematic%20report‐ %20Access.pdf. Himayatullah, K. and Abuturab, K. (2008) Natural hazards and disaster management in Pakistan, [Online], http://mpra.ub.uni‐muenchen.de/11052/1/MPRA_paper_11052.pdf. infoDev .(2009) Disaster Risk Reduction in the Information Age,[online], www.infodev.org/en/Document.661.pdf. Kennedy, M. M. (2007) Defining a literature, Educational Researcher, Vol. 36,No.3,pp 139–147. Kothari, C.R. (2004) Research methodology: Methods and techniques (2nd ed.). New Delhi, India: Vishwaprakashan. Laughton, E .U.D. (U.D) The challenges of reconstruction/rehabilitating ICT infrastructure, financing and coordination. Digicel Jamaica Limited,[online],http://www.itu.int/ITU‐ D/emergencytelecoms/events/CaribbeanForum/documents/Day2/CTO%20Presentation%20‐ %20Edward%20Laughton.pdf.

494

Martha Kabaka and Juliet Stoltenkamp Munodawafa,J.(2008) Role of Telecommunications and ICTs in Disaster Management.ITU Southern and East Africa Workshop on the use of Telecommunications/ICT for Disaster Management: Savings Lives, Lusaka, Zambia, 17‐18 July 2008,[online],http://www.itu.int/ITU‐ D/emergencytelecoms/events/Zambia/presentations/sata_%20role_%20of_telecommunications_and_ics_in_%20dis aster_management.pdf. Nelson, F. (2009) Thematic Session: ICT for Disaster Risk Reduction, Experience and Perspective: Use of ICT for Disaster Risk Management in Samoa, [online] www.unapcict.org/ecohub/resources/06.Samoa.ppt. Pillay, G. (2011) Making cities resilient; My city is ready, [Online], https://www.capetown.gov.za/en/ExternalRelations2/Documents/International%20trip%20Reports%20and%20Feed back/UNISDR%20Making%20Cities%20Resilient‐ Incheon%20S%20Korea/UNISDR%20ROLE%20MODEL%20CITY%20feedback%20summary%20report.pdf. Sagun, A. (2010) Chapter 7, Efficient Deployment of ICT Tools in Disaster Management Process, [online], Anglia Ruskin University, UK, http://www.irma‐international.org/viewtitle/44846/. Sangrà, A., Vlachopoulos, D., and Cabrera, N. (2012) Building an Inclusive Definition of E‐learning: An Approach to the Conceptual Framework, The International Review of Research in open and Distance Learning,Vol.13,No.2, pp145‐159. Simonis, I., Vahed, A. and Moodley, D. (2009) “Integrated risk management in South Africa: between technological features and organizational reality”,[online]http://researchspace.csir.co.za/dspace/handle/10204/3532. Stockley, D. (2012) E‐learning Definition and Explanation (E‐learning, Online Training, Online Learning), [online] http://derekstockley.com.au/e‐learning‐definition.html. South Africa (Republic). (2002) Disaster Management Act. (Act No 57 of 2002). Government Gazette No. 24252, Pretoria, RSA: Government Printers. South Africa (Republic). (2005) Final draft National Disaster Management Framework. Government Gazette No. 26390, Notice 974. Pretoria: Government Printers. Subedi,J.(2010) Disaster Informatics: Information Management as a Tool for Effective Disaster Risk Reduction. In Asimakopoulou ,E. AND Bessis,N (eds.), Advanced ICTs for Disaster Management and Threat Detection: Collaborative and Distributed Frameworks,pp.415. United Nations‐Asian Pacific Training Centre for Information and Communication Technology for Development /Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. (2011) Briefing Note 9: ICT for Disaster Risk Management Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre, [online], http://www.unapcict.org/ecohub/briefing‐note‐9‐ict‐for‐disaster‐risk‐ management. United Nations. (2004) Living with risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives. Partnership with International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR), Vol. 1, Geneva, Hel, UN Press. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR). (2011) Global assessment report on disaster risk reduction. Geneva, Hel: UN Press. United Nations Asian and Pacific Training Centre for Information and Communication Technology for Development. (2010) ICT for Disaster Risk Reduction in Asia and the Pacific. Songdo‐dong, Yeonsu‐gu, Incheon City: Republic of Korea. University of Canberra. (2006) Writing a Literature Review, [online], http://www.canberra.edu.au/studyskills/writing/literature. Wong, D. (2007) “A critical literature review on e‐learning limitations”, UCSI JASA Journal for the Advancement of Science and Arts, Vol. 2, pp. 55‐62 (Science & Technology Issue). Yin, R. K. (1984) Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA, Sage. Zainal, Z. (2007) Case study as a research method, Journal Kemanusiaan, Vol.9, pp 1‐6. [Online], http://eprints.utm.my/8221/1/ZZainal2007‐Case_study_as_a_Research.pdf.

495

From Cellphone to Computer: University Students’ use of Technology in First Year Caroline Magunje and Cheryl Brown Africa University, Mutare, Zimbabwe University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa cmagunje@gmail.com cheryl.brown@uct.ac.za st Abstract: Students require an increasing range of digital literacies to succeed academically in 21 Century (Beetham, Littlejohn and McGill 2010). For disadvantaged South African students this can be a challenge as many have not grown up with computers (Czerniewicz, Williams and Brown 2009). Whilst mobile phones are pervasive even in impoverished South Africa, universities value computers above other technologies which can create additional barriers for students adjusting to other stresses and challenges of first year (Czerniewicz and Brown 2012). This is particularly true for female science students who are already navigating the terrain of a male dominated discipline along with the usual stress of first year experience (Jamelske 2009). This study explores four female first year science students experiences of using mobile technology at University. All students came from disadvantaged backgrounds and had not used a computer before they got to University but had acquired smart phones to come to University. The students were interviewed twice during the semester and allowed the researcher access to their social network to observe their online interactions .Using Gee’s notions of Big D and little d (D) discourses we examined students technological identities (Gee 2005). Based on Brown’s (2012) identification of the different ways students dealt with being digital migrants we observed that the way students engaged with technology also differed in this context. For one girl it made her feel even more like an outsider whereas for another it enabled her to leave the old behind and embrace a new opportunity not previously available to her. Interestingly two students felt that their use of their cell phone and their experiences of the internet through this medium had facilitated their learning and enabled them to feel more confident engaging with computers. This contributes to discussions about the transferability of skills and abilities acquired through use of mobile phones to the more academic computer oriented environment (Rapetti, Picco and Vannini 2011).

Keywords: mobile phones, digital literacy, first year experience, female students

1. Introduction Globally, Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) are becoming increasingly fundamental to teaching and learning within higher education institutions (HEIs) (Kukulska‐Holmes 2012). However assumptions that all students’ entering university in the new millennium are “digital natives” (Prensky, 2001) are not necessarily true in the African context (Brown and Czerniewicz 2010). The concept of the digital divide is still a reality on the continent, with access and use of ICTs heavily dependent on a variety of social factors (Czerniewicz and Brown, 2009). In South Africa, this digital divide is defined by huge socio‐economic disparities as a result of the apartheid era (Martindale, 2002). Studies have shown that in within HEIs there are students’ who lack ICT experience and who have never been exposed to computers prior to university (Thinyane 2010) and have been termed “digital strangers” (Czerniewicz and Brown, 2010). Digital strangers’ face challenges integrating into the computer dominated university environment (Czerniewicz and Brown 2012). However knowing how to utilise the technological ecosystem of university life is becoming a critical component of academic success (Goode, 2010). However, as argued by Kreutzer (2009) whilst computers and the internet remain in the hands of a selected few in South Africa, mobile phone penetration has sky rocketed with the most remote areas in the country accessing mobile networks. A study of ICT access and use in South African HEIs has shown that among students, in contrast to computer access, cell phone ownership is pervasive and is neither gender specific nor socially differentiated, and that despite cost implications, cell phone internet access is evenly distributed across socio economic groups of students’ (Czerniewicz, Williams and Brown 2009). In this paper we are interested in the role of the mobile phone in facilitating learning for students. The first year of study can prove particularly challenging for students entering university as they settle into the new learning environment and begin to understand what is required of them (Hatt and Baxter 2003; Yorke 2005). Students from disadvantaged backgrounds may experience particular difficulties in their transition into

496

Caroline Magunje and Cheryl Brown university because of their different skills, experiences and expectations compared with advantaged students (Walker, Matthew, and Black 2004). The degree of responsibility that students are expected to take for their own learning can prove surprising and difficult to adjust to, particularly where it is contrary to previous educational experiences (Leathwood and O’Connell 2003; Sambell and Hubbard 2004). Though there has always been concern on the integration of first year students into university life (Rhodes and Nevill, 2004),this is particularly true for female science students who are already navigating the terrain of a male dominated discipline along with the usual stress of first year experience (Jamelske 2009). The use of computers for learning may intensify the problems that first year science female students from disadvantaged background face as new students at big institutions. To cope in the highly demanding environment students have to adopt survival skills. We explored students’ use of mobile phones particularly for informal and effective learning and examined how this easily accessible technology facilitated students transition into a computer centered learning environment.

2. The study The research was conducted in 2012 and followed a case study approach, working with four female first year science students in an extended program with the aim to explore real people in real contexts, with an emphasis on understanding the context as a determinant of both cause and effect (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2007). The four students Precious, Fudge, Bianca and Faith, pseudonyms selected by the participants themselves, all came from disadvantaged backgrounds far away from UCT. They did not speak English as a home language and had not used a computer before they got to University but had mobile phones. The students were part of the General Entry Program in Sciences (GEPS) program, an HEI initiative to produce more science graduates as well as represent students who have to go an extra mile to get into the science field as a result of their background. The participants’ choice to pursue a science degree attestsin some way to their personal drive and agency. The students were interviewed twice during the year and allowed the researcher access to their social network to observe their online interactions. Viewing identities as a product of participation in communities (i.e. as contextually specific) can strengthen investigation of how ICT experiences influences an individual’s relationship with technology (Goode, 2010). Using Gee’s notions of Big D and little d (D) discourses we examined students’ technological identities. Gee (1996,1998) assumes that meaning, a system of creative, generative, yet structured possibilities is linked through to what he refers to as “d” and “D”iscourse. Little “d” discourse is language bits or words we use, whilst big “D” “D”iscourse involves ways of believing, representing, acting, performing and valuing that comprise what it means to be a “competent” user of language in particular discursive contexts (in this case technology) (Rogers 2004). Big D Discourse therefore refers to identity; not individual identity but group identity‐ a way that an individual thinks, speaks and acts that is recognized by others in relation to the social world (Brown, 2011). The language bits (little d discourse) and the social cultural models (big D Discourse) are constitutive and work together to construct, maintain and transform interactions (Rogers 2005). Data was analysed according to four main themes namely; Context, Identity, Power and Meaning. Gee (2005) recommends that asking questions about identities, situated meaning, social relationships and connections and social goods to help us understand the domination, emancipatory and power ideologies hidden in the statements. Data from interviews was organized thematically within the constructs and the text was unpacked to uncover what students thought, felt, valued and how they personally viewed ICTs. Identity and meaning are essential in understanding how new technologies are appropriated; context is necessary to examine the system as a whole and how issues of power surface, influencing possibilities within the contexts actors operate within (Brown 2012). Avgerou and Madon (2004) argued for the need to understand new technologies (internet and mobile phones) which is only possible if we consider their symbolic meaning in everyday life. As noted by Cushman and McLean (2008) the most important thing is not just how the technology is adopted but how it is integrated into people’s lives. The context in which the technological tool is being used becomes important, (in this case the mobile phone) especially in the developing country context (Avgerou and Madon, 2004).

497

Caroline Magunje and Cheryl Brown

3. Findings and discussion The study showed that these students were digital strangers when they arrived at university. They had minimal experience in the use of computers, and did not have access in their homes. The computer literacy test which was compulsory at the beginning of their first year (although this has since changed), alienated them from the rest of the first year student body. At an institution where class is usually irrelevant the students felt discriminated against and questioned why resources were so unequal in the country. The computer training provided for them did not provide them with the necessary skills and confidence needed to survive in computer based learning in their discipline, mainly because they already felt estranged from the university Discourse. “At least no essays in sciences but in BEAs we even research and do databases. The thing is like when you go to Microsoft words it’s easy but now it’s excel. Its eeh… its struggling man” (Precious Int. 1). Whilst the this student expressed relief that they were not in the Faculty of Humanities which they believed has more intense computer based learning, complicated computer applications like Excel in their own field left nonetheless left them feeling powerless and vulnerable.

Educators give out computer based tasks without necessarily considering the different technological background of the student body; in addition announcements and resources are given on the Learning Management System under the assumption that everyone is comfortable with computers. This compulsory use of computers might be considered to be intimidating for disadvantaged students as some end up concluding that technology is not for them. Imposed computer based learning left the girls in this study powerless and dominated “like the issue of computers is that I never had the chance to be with a computer before I came here and like Jaa, It was very challenging for me because, I actually chose computer sciences, and actually I didn’t know what it was all about [Bianca Int 1]. Brown and Czerniewicz (2006) study of ICTs access and use at HEIs showed that students from disadvantaged backgrounds were fearful of computers and less positive about their use as a beneficial tool. Whilst the students faced problems in using computer related applications, the study shows that the students regard their mobile phones as the most important technology in their lives. “Cell phone, Jaa, you can go on internet with your cell phone, go on TV, it’s like everything in one. You can use your phone in place of a computer” [Fudge Int 1]. The technology had been part of their Discourse most of their lives and they feel comfortable using it at University. This corresponds with the observation by Czerniewicz, Williams and Brown (2009) that in contrast to computer access, cell phone ownership at HEIs is pervasive and ownership is not socially differentiated. The students identify themselves with their mobile phone as it is part of who they are. Of note is how the two constructs of power and identity merge as the girls expressed the importance of mobile phones in their life. This suggests that the technology is not only part of the girls Discourse but also an important empowerment tool at university. The students appreciate its ubiquitous nature and the fact that it is portable and can be used in place of computer for some purposes. The study also showed that these students felt emancipated and empowered by the mobile phone as they used it to support their academic life through affective and informal learning. Support through affective learning Given that these four female students were teenagers located far away from home for the first time they needed emotional support from family and friends. Bianca notes that “even if I don’t have anything on my wall I would still inbox people for academic or emotional support, I always inbox my aunt on Facebook and she helps me when I am low” [Bianca Int. 2]. Affective learning was understand to be the attitudes, motivation, values and the expression which often involves statements of opinion and beliefs of an assessment of worth (Smith and Ragan, 1999).The study showed that whilst students used their mobile phones to call home or send text messages to their parents or guardians, internet enabled applications on their mobile phones such as Facebook, Blackberry Messenger, Whatsapp and Mixit also enabled them to get the emotional support essential for their intellectual well‐being in a challenging academic field. “Jaa I always write on my status like, maths is giving me stress and people respond to me and they say like , hang in there and some of them are like Jaa, maths, so yes I get a lot of support.” [Fudge Interview 2] Facebook is especially important for the students as the objectives of affective learning are typically oriented towards participants’ feelings and they are often difficult to measure in

498

Caroline Magunje and Cheryl Brown quantifiable terms, however it is important that students appreciate what they are learning or ‘feel good’ about themselves whilst in a learning context (Tooman, n.d.). Facebook allowed the students to air their feelings, values, appreciation, enthusiasm, motivations and attitudes on a democratic platform whilst at UCT. The postings show emotions influenced by the learners’ mood and also reactions influenced by the learning process as elaborated by Wlodowski (1985). The social networking site therefore provides these conditions, which according to Mezirow (1990) are the ideal learning conditions for affective dimension to be successful: an environment which promotes a sense of safety, openness and trust and activities that encourage the exploration of alternative personal perspective problem posing and critical reflection. Support through informal learning Whilst mobile phones were a familiar technology for the four students in this study, the tool found new meaning for the students as it gave them the freedom to use it for the things they were supposed to do on the computer but they were not yet able or comfortable to do. Whilst it was used for individual learning processes such as internet search, accessing the UCT Learning Management System, Vula, studying aid through recording of own notes and listening to one self, the mobile technology mainly supported learning from others through its various applications. This learner driven intentional learning that happens outside of the “classroom” has been termed informal learning (Eraut 2004). Informal learning provides a simple contrast to formal learning or training that suggests greater freedom for learners as it recognizes the social significance of learning from other people. The mobile phone enabled the students to initiate learning outside school hours with a familiar tool using languages and phrases that they were comfortable with, thus giving clarity to concepts that would have been missed or misunderstood in formal learning context. “I can go on Vula on my small phone though it’s small, when I was studying for exams I took pictures of stuff and I recorded myself reading a text and then I would listen to myself on my phone with ear phones, Jaa I asked my friends questions on BBM, at one time I asked a friend a question on Facebook via messages but she took forever to reply” (Fudge Int. 2) Students would ask course related questions to classmates using Whatsapp or BBM (common instant messaging platforms on smartphones) and receive feedback which was not only useful at that moment, but also later as the students would go back to the postings to get clarity. Facebook was also instrumental for informal learning as the students would inbox each other with questions and answers and the tool also affords the storage of such information for later use. The mobile phone was therefore an important aspect of the students’ technology Discourse at University and it empowered them to venture with more confidence into the challenges of academic life.

4. Discussion By the second semester the students had attained some degree of autonomy with the use of computers ranging from very small to relatively large extent. The students who were still struggling with the computer seemed to have developed a negative attitude towards the technology because they felt that no matter how much they tried, they always faced a hindrance in the use of the computer such as something new that they need to learn. For example Bianca reiterated that she was not good with technology and just used the computer because she had to or when she has nothing better to do. Brown (2012) describes such students as ‘aliens’ as they hover on the outskirts of the dominant Discourse, feeling excluded, crossing over for short period of time and then heading back home to familiar terrain, which for these students, was the mobile phone. Interestingly Fudge and Faith found some transferable skills from the mobile phone to the computer especially in terms of keyboards which they noted were structured the same, (QWERTY keyboards) and noted that their typing skills on the computer have greatly improved as they can go to the letters without thinking. This affirms one role of mobile phones in helping students who did not have previous experience using computers to transfer the skills attained on the phone to the computer. Students confirmed that the mobile phone had allowed them to master the computer to a certain extent. Thus the object/tool from the primary Discourse of the students has helped them to master a new object/tool in their secondary Discourse. Faith, who intends to major in Computer Sciences, has gone a step further in her quest to grasp the use of computers by dedicating most of her time to the technology. Most of her time is spent on a computer to the

499

Caroline Magunje and Cheryl Brown extent that on vacation she was teaching her father how to use the tool through her newly acquired laptop. Brown (2012) described such students as ‘escapee’ students who are keen to get away from the confinements of where they have been and seeking better opportunities. She describes ‘escapees’ as outsiders who are keen to make the most of opportunities, by making a conscious decision to leave the old behind and to be proactive in acquiring the new, such students are eager to learn but aware of their limitations. Precious was also proud of her success in the use of computers in the second semester. But she attributed this to her constant practice and her detachment from her mobile phone. She perceived that her mobile phone was a distraction and a hindrance to the acquiring of important computer skills, which were essential in university life. She believed her mobile phone couldn’t help her in any way to use a computer better. Here there was a contradiction between her primary Discourse and secondary Discourse, and shunning her mobile phone altogether was a strategy for trying to fit into the Discourse of higher education at the cost of her identity. Brown (2012) described such students as ‘the converted’ as she noted that for such students’, migration into computer based learning is like a religious conversion where they leave the old behind and accept the new in the hope of belonging. She perceives that such students don the new cloak of technology and hope everyone sees them as indigenous inhabitants in the use of computers whilst they are figuring it out as they go along.

5. Conclusion Using Gee’s notion of (d)Discourses the study explored the experiences of first year female science students as they were exposed to the necessary use of computers at university. It examined how they used their mobile phones, which unlike computers have been part of their discourse for a longer time, to support and make the transition to the requirements of academic life. The study has shown that despite being disempowered as young women within their culture they have risen above gender Discourse and succeeded in venturing into a historically male dominated science field. Despite their societal disadvantage in terms of material possessions, in this case technologies such as computers, the girls sought emancipation through the use of a familiar technological tool to support themselves in a challenging academic environment. Whilst the dominant computer based learning is more beneficial to middle class and elite students during the first year of university it is the disadvantaged students who have had little use or never used computers prior to university who are at the losing end. If one views emancipation as the process through which humans (individually or collectively) remove obstacles standing in their way of achieving freedom / potential (Mingers and Willcocks, 2004), then the mobile phone has become an emancipatory tool for disadvantaged students to achieve freedom and reach their potential in the rather imposing and dominated environment of computer education. Critical Discourse Analysis was useful in enabling the unpacking of ideology, domination, power, emancipation and identity within in this research. Thus, much as the computer is a governing technology at university (which left the female science students from disadvantaged backgrounds powerless and dominated, as it was not part of their Discourse) they rose above the repressive powers of using an unfamiliar technological tool by seeking emancipation through a familiar tool, namely the mobile phone, to achieve freedom and reach their potential in a challenging academic context. As noted by Rapetti, Picco and Vannini (2011) mobile devices are pivotal in students’ everyday life and mobile technologies are expected to play a bridging role between informal and formal practices of learning.

References Avgerou, C., Madon, S. (2004). Framing IS studies:Understanding the Social Context of IS innovation. In C. C. Avgerou, The Social Study of Information and Communication Contexts : Innovation, Actors, and Context (pp. 162–182). Oxford: Oxford University of Technology. Beetham H, Littlejohn, A , McGill, L (2010) . Beyond competence: digital literacies as knowledge practices, and implications for learner development. A paper for the ESRC Seminar Series Literacies for the Digital University (LiDU), Feb2010 Brown, C. (2012) University Students as Digital Migrants. Language and Literacy. Volume 14, Issue 2, Special Issue 2012. Page 41 Brown, C and Czerniewicz, L. (2010) “Debunking the “digital native”: beyond digital apartheid, towards digital democracy” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 26, 357–369 Brown, C., Czerniewicz, L., Pedersen, J. (2008). Doing It For Themselves. How South African University Students Learn to Use Computers for their Studies. Proceedings of the 10th Annual conference on World Wide. Cape Town: Cape Peninsula University of Technology.

500

Caroline Magunje and Cheryl Brown Cohen, L ; Manion, L & Morrison, K .(2000). Research Methods in Education (5th edition). London: RoutledgeFalmer Cushman, M., McLean, R. (2008). Exclusion, Inclusion and Changing the Face of Information Systems Research. Information, Technology and People, 21 (3), 213‐221. Czerniewicz, L. and Brown, C. (2009). A virtual wheel of fortune? Enablers and constraints of ICTs in higher education in South Africa. In S. Marshall, W. Kinuthia and W. Taylor (Eds). Bridging the knowledge divide: Educational Technology for Development. (pp. 57‐76). Colorado, Information Age Publishing Czerniewicz, L & Brown, C (2012). The habitus of digital “strangers” in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‐8535.2012.01281.x Czerniewicz, L., Williams, K., and Brown, C. (2009) Students make a plan: understanding student agency in constraining conditions. ALT‐J Research in Learning Technology. Issue 17 (2) Eraut, M. (2004). Informal learning in the workplace. Studies in Continuing Education 26 (2), 247‐273. Gee, J. (1996). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Methods. New York: Routledge. Gee, J. (1998). Discourse Analysis, Learning and Social Practice: A Methodological Syudy. Review of research in Education, 119‐169. Gee, J. P. (2005). An introduction to discourse analysis : Theory and method (2nd ed.). London ; New York: Routledge. Gee, J. P. (2005). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis : Theory and Method (2nd ed.). London ; New York:: Routledge. Gee, J. P. (2008). What Video Games have to Teach Us about Learning and Literacy. Palgrave: MacMillan. Goode, J. (2010). The Digital Identity Divide: How Technological Knowledge Impacts College Students. New Media Society 12 (3), 495‐513. Hatt, S., Baxter A. (2003). From FE to HE: Studies in Transition. Journal of Widening Participation and Lifelong Learning 5 (2), 18‐29. Jamelske, E (2009) Measuring the impact of a university first‐year experience program on student GPA and retention. High Education 57:373–391 Kreutzer, T. (2009). Assessing Cell Phone Usage in a South African Township School. International Journal of Education and Development usin ICTS: http://ijedict.dec.uwi.edu/viewarticle.php?id=862&layout=html. Kukulska‐Holmes, A. (2012). How should the higher education workforce adapt to advancements in technology for teaching and learning? The Internet and Higher Education 15(4), 247–254. Leathwood, C., O'Connel, P. (2003). 'Its a struggle' The Construction of "the new students" in Higher Education. Journal of Educatuion Policy 18 (6), 597‐615. Martindale, L. (2002 ). Bridging the digital divide in South Africa. Available at http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/5966 accessed on 22 April 2013 Mezirow, J. (1990). Fostering Critical Reflection in Adulthood: A Guide to Transformative and Emancipation Education. San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass. Mingers, J., Willcocks, L. (2004). Social Theory and Philosophy of Information Systems. West Sussex: John Willey and Sons. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon 9 (5). Rogers, R. (2004). Setting an agenda for critical discourse analysis in education. In R. Rogers (Ed.). An introduction to Critical Discourse Analysis (pp. 237‐254). Mahwah, New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Rapetti E., Picco A., Vannini S. (2011), Is mobile learning a resource in higher education? Data evidence from an empirical research in Ticino (Switzerland), Journal of e‐Learning and Knowledge Society, English Edition, v.7, n.2, 47‐57. ISSN: 1826‐6223, e‐ISSN:1971‐8829 Rhodes, C., Nevill, A. (2004). Academic and Social Integration in Higher Education: A Survey of Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction within a First‐Year Education Studies Cohort at a New University. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 179‐193. Sambell, K. and Hubbard, A. (2004) The role of formative ‘low‐stakes’ assessment in supporting non‐traditional students’ retention and progression in higher education: student perspectives. Widening Participation and Lifelong Learning 6(2): 25–36. Smith P., Ragan, T.J. (1999). Instructional Design. New York: Willey and Sons. Thinyane, H. (2010). Are digital natives a world‐wide phenomenon? An investigation into South African first year students’ use and experience with technology. Computers & Education 55(3): 406‐414. Trooman, T. (n.d.). Affective Learning Activities to promote value comprehension. Retrieved October 16, 2012, from www.soulsticetraining.com/commetary/affective.html Walker, L., Matthew, B., Black, F. (2004). Widening Access and Students Non‐completion: An inevitable link? International Journal of Lifelong Education 23 (1), 43‐59. Wlodowski, R. (1985). Enhancing Adult Motivation to Learn. San francisco: Jossey‐Bass. Yorke, M. (2005). Formative Assessment in Hiigher Education:Its significance for employability and steps towards enhancement. Tertiary Education and Management 11 (3), 219‐238.

501

502

Work in Progress Papers

503

504

WebSci@UHI: Teaching Web Science in a Web Science Fashion Erik Cambria1, Ian Barnes2, Elizabeth Brooks3 and Chris Eckl4 1 MIT Media Laboratory, USA 2 Moray College, UK 3 University of Highlands and Islands, UK 4 Sitekit Solutions Ltd., UK cambria@media.mit.edu ian.barnes@moray.uhi.ac.uk elizabeth.brooks@uhi.ac.uk chris.eckl@sitekit.net Abstract: WebSci@UHI is a new undergraduate course providing a thorough and comprehensive introduction to the technological, social, political, economic, and psychological aspects of the 20 years of the Web. It explores the breadth of disciplines that today contribute to Web Science research in a Web Science fashion, that is, through a novel approach to teaching that exploits recent Social Web technologies for delivering the course beyond space, time, and matter. Keywords: multidisciplinary teaching, blended e‐learning, web science

1. Introduction Online learning is a viable mode of instruction, but it should not be a replication of stand‐up education. Structure can vary, but the learners’ needs and the learning situation should always be foremost in the minds of the education professionals. Success in e‐learning depends on support in a variety of ways considering several factors: the readiness and openness of a culture to share information in a comprehensive manner, the readiness of management to invest resources in developing a robust infrastructure, and the readiness of lecturer to design learner‐centred curriculum along an ever‐expanding continuum of students’ needs (Rosenberg 2001). With these three factors in mind, we designed WebSci@UHI (http://sentic.net/websci), a new undergraduate course on Web Science at the University of the Highlands and Islands (UHI), a partnership of colleges, learning and research centres located throughout the Highlands and Islands of Scotland. WebSci@UHI is a project started in 2010 in collaboration with Moray College, a UHI partner college based in Elgin, and Sitekit Labs, the research branch of Sitekit Solutions Ltd. in the Isle of Skye. The course is taught collaborately with prepared lectures from Erik Cambria, associate researcher at the MIT Media Laboratory, and guest speakers with discussion tutorials supervised by Ian Barnes, lecturer in computing and IT at Moray College, Elizabeth Brooks, subject network leader for computing and IT at UHI, and Chris Eckl, Sitekit Labs research director. The module provides a thorough and comprehensive introduction to the technological, social, political, economic, and psychological aspects of the 20 years of the Web, and explores the nature and history of Web Science as an emerging research area, along with the breadth of disciplines that today contribute to Web Science research. The course was designed by ensuring that in‐site lectures always had the time to properly integrate face‐to‐face and online material (Aycock et al. 2002), and trying to be as much as possible sensitive to the needs of learners as individuals (Graff 2003), active learning (Hinterberger et al. 2003), repetition and elaboration (Boyle and Nicol 2003), the requirement for prompt and frequent feedback (Morris and Walker 2006), and design principles related to the course outcomes, e.g., attention to detail (Stubbs et al. 2006). The structure of the paper is as follows: Section 2 presents some background information and related initiatives in the field of Web Science; Sections 3 explains how the course is delivered beyond space, time, and matter; Section 4 shows how and why the course is evolving from year to year; finally, Section 5 comprises concluding remarks and future directions.

2. Background Since its inception, the World Wide Web has changed the ways scientists communicate, collaborate, and educate. There is, however, a growing realization among many researchers that a clear research agenda aimed

505

Erik Cambria et al. at understanding the current, evolving, and potential Web is needed. The Web is an engineered space created through formally specified languages and protocols. However, because humans are the creators of Web pages and links between them, their interactions form emergent patterns in the Web at a macroscopic scale. These human interactions are, in turn, governed by social conventions and laws (Berners‐Lee et al. 2006). Web Science, therefore, is inherently interdisciplinary – its goal is to both understand the growth of the Web and to create approaches that allow new powerful and more beneficial patterns to occur. In recent years, growing interest in the field of Web Science has been proved by initiatives such as the opening of the Southampton Web Science Doctoral Training Centre and the organization of a Masters Program in Web Science at the Department of Mathematics in Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. There are also a number of Web Science courses, mainly in UK and US, for master students but, till last year, no such opportunity had been offered to undergraduates in the UK, mostly for the broad vision and the research approach needed to handle the multidisciplinarity of the field, which risks being too confusing for undergraduate students. In this context, WebSci@UHI pioneered the first course at undergraduate‐level that aims to guide students’ first steps towards a holistic vision of what the Web is today and what it is becoming. Besides course target, WebSci@UHI’s novelty lies in the combination of different modes of web‐based technology (e.g., live virtual classroom, self‐paced instruction, collaborative learning, streaming video, audio, and text) to accomplish an educational goal, the combination of various pedagogical approaches (e.g., constructivism, behaviorism, cognitivism) to produce an optimal learning outcome, the combination of different forms of instructional technology (e.g., online video and web‐based education) with instructor‐led tutorials. The main aim of WebSci@UHI, in fact, is to provide students with the knowledge, skills, attitude, and values to begin to understand and study the Web with a holistic approach, rather than in a limited and compartmental way.

3. A student‐centric way of teaching Currently, the most common type of blended learning is the provision of supplementary resources for courses that are conducted predominantly along traditional lines through an institutionally supported virtual learning environment (VLE) (Sharpe et al. 2006). WebSci@UHI, in turn, aims to make use of the Web to facilitate interaction and communication and replace other modes of teaching and learning, while helping students to take a holistic view of the interaction of technology and their learning, including the use of their own technologies. While students recognize the value in the blend of face‐to‐face and technology supported activities, in fact, there are large individual differences in how they experience the blend. Thus, it is important that students understand the role of technology in their learning and the implications for their study strategies and engagement in learning activities. There is an increasing recognition that students are making use of their own technology, as well as those provided for them, and that they are doing this in ways that are not planned for, difficult to predict, and may not be immediately visible to their teachers and researchers. Hence, as well as the Web evolved from information‐centric to user‐centric, Web Science teaching has to evolve from content‐ centric to student‐centric.

3.1 Beyond space WebSci@UHI is delivered via the UHI VLE and Video Conferencing (VC) systems, which allow both students and lecturers to participate in lessons and tutorials from wherever they were located. This use of technology, for example, allowed Jon Udell, Microsoft evangelist, to join the class for the tutorial session from his home in New Hampshire after the class had viewed a lecture, which had been previously given by him at Harvard University. This gave students the chance to ask questions and discuss the topic directly with Jon, which would otherwise have been impossible. The WebSci@UHI Facebook page (http://facebook.com/websciatuhi) and the discussion board in the UHI VLE, moreover, allow students and lecturers to interact both before and after the VC lecture. Since only two of the lecturers are usually located in the same office, distance also presents a possible barrier to collaboration

506

Erik Cambria et al. before lectures and delivery of those lectures and the following tutorials. To this end, we use Google Docs and Etherpad (for collaboratively editing course slides and documents), email and the VLE (for organizing course logistics), and Skype (for regular discussions about students’ feedback).

Figure 1: A screenshot of UHI VLE

3.2 Beyond time Because Erik Cambria is based in Boston, it is not always practical for him to deliver all the lectures live by VC. Erik addresses this by preparing lectures in advance as an audio track to accompany the slides, YouTube is used to store video recordings of a prologue and epilogue for each lecture and the audio track and slides are used as the lecture. The advantage of this is that the lecturers can pause the slides and answer students’ queries. This investment in the teaching materials has given us re‐usable learning objects, which can be used in future years. Through the VLE discussion board, moreover, we can keep students engaged and prevent them from feeling disenfranchised or marginalized by the use of technology (Dickey 2004). In an online learning environment or in blended learning where face‐to‐face contact is limited, in fact, discussion boards and chatrooms can provide a sense of involvement in, and interaction with, a community of learners (Weller 2007). Interaction and learning climate, moreover, are among the primary determinants of student learning satisfaction with blended e‐learning system environments (Motteram and Forrester 2005), but it is also important to avoid the information overload that could occur if students posted too much or posted contributions not very relevant to the discussion topic (Kear and Heap 2007). We also monitor students’ attitude toward the learning environment by means of sentic computing (Cambria and Hussain 2012), a novel concept‐level approach to opinion mining that enables the automatic analysis of VLE discussion board’s contents and, hence, the detection of emotions such as interest, satisfaction, or frustration.

3.3 Beyond matter The module aims to provide students with the knowledge, skills, attitude, and values to begin to understand and study the Web with a holistic approach rather than in a limited and compartmentalized way. As a result of its interdisciplinary nature, WebSci@UHI is offered, for the very first time at UHI, to all degree students across the UHI network of partner colleges and in particular across all disciplines. The first time we ran the course, we had one non‐computing student in the class. Having her different perspective offered during class discussions

507

Erik Cambria et al. greatly enriched the course experience for our main group of computing students. Since content feature is a primary determinant of student satisfaction with blended e‐learning system environments (Wu et al. 2010), WebSci@UHI also offers students the possibility to look at Web Science from many perspectives by involving four different guest lecturers every year, coming either from academia or the business world.

4. An evolving course WebSci@UHI program evolves each year as the Web evolves. This is due to the need to both keep the course contents up‐to‐date with fast‐evolving Web technologies and meet students’ needs and interests according to their feedback on module contents and teaching modalities. To this end, we undertook an analysis of the successful and less successful features of the current course, including student feedback (Boyle 2005). The main issue raised by students at the end of the first course (second semester 2010/2011) was that it was too abstract. Students had the impression that, on the one hand, a lot of the materials were a bit over their heads, while, on the other hand, it seemed very general, with no detail filled in, at times to the point where it appeared simplistic. While this style might be appropriate for highly motivated graduate students with good research skills who can fill in all the gaps for themselves, for undergraduates it was a bit confusing. We responded to this by introducing more tutorial/lab exercises to supplement lectures and discussions. For example, we asked each student to find a Wikipedia page and attempt to engage the community of people maintaining that page, by editing it to correct an error or by posting on the associated comments page. The goal here was for them to enter and observe the community a bit like an anthropologist visiting a village in the New Guinea highlands for a few months. We also added a lecture on search engines and graph theory in order to add a little bit of semi‐ mathematical/computer science content to the course. The lecture covered enough graph theory to explain the simplest version of the page rank algorithm, but also covered more general and interdisciplinary issues around search engines. Followed up by a practical exercise to calculate page rank by hand for a very small web. For the first assessment—reviewing a research paper—the main change this time was that we told them what paper to review, and they all reviewed the same paper. This made the assessment more transparent and consistent, and also meant that they were all looking at a paper that we had chosen carefully to have some interesting features, e.g., an interdisciplinary approach and a somewhat controversial position that went against other research in the field. Additionally, we included a section on Referencing in Lecture 2 in order to address the lack of knowledge among students about how to cite and reference sources that we were surprised to encounter the first time. WebSci@UHI, in fact, is not just about learning Web Science, but also acquiring a Web Science methodology.

5. Conclusions The Web has now become so prevalent in the lives of undergraduates that discussions about whether to exploit it or not for education no longer seem relevant. The pertinent questions now are around how we should use it for education and evaluate such use, in parallel with face‐to‐face teaching. To this end, WebSci@UHI is exploring how the breadth of disciplines that today contribute to Web Science research can be taught to undergraduates in a Web Science fashion, that is, through a novel approach to teaching that exploits recent Social Web technologies for delivering the course beyond space, time, and matter. As well as we do in our research, in fact, in our teaching activity we always try to bind cognitive with affective knowledge by generating interest and engagement through real‐world examples, case studies and metaphors to show the applicability of what we are learning and to make challenging topics more assessable to students, possibly trying to involve off‐site students as much as possible. Successful participation within an online community, in fact, involves emotional dimensions and an understanding of the norms of the community (Guildberg and Mackness 2009). We believe that teaching is a two‐way process in which both lectures and students interact with and learn from each other, in a dynamic and engaging environment that challenges and prompts students to actively

508

Erik Cambria et al. participate in their learning process with the goal of improving their higher‐order cognitive and decision‐ making skills.

References Aycock, A., Garnham, C., and Kaleta, R. (2002) “Lessons Learned from the Hybrid Course Project”, Teaching with Technology Today, 8. Berners‐Lee, T., Hall, W., Hendler, J., Shadbolt, N., and Weitzner, D. (2006) “Creating a Science of the Web”. Science Vol. 313, no. 5788, pp. 769‐771. Boyle, J. and Nicol, D. (2003) “Using Classroom Communication Systems to Support Interaction and Discussion in Large Class Settings”. ALT‐J. 11 (3), 43‐57. Boyle, T. (2005) “A Dynamic, Systematic Method for Developing Blended Learning”. Education, Communication and Information. 5 (3), 221‐232. Cambria, E. and Hussain, A. (2012) “Sentic Computing: Techniques, Tools, and Applications”. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer Dickey, M. (2004) “The Impact of Web‐Logs (Blogs) on Student Perceptions of Isolation and Alienation in a Web‐Based Distance‐Learning Environment”. Open Learning 19(3):279–291. Graff, M. (2003) “Individual Differences in Sense of Classroom Community in a Blended Learning Environment”. Journal of Educational Media 28:2‐3. Guildberg, K. and Mackness, J. (2009) “Foundations of Communities of Practice; Enablers and Barriers to Participation”, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25: 528‐538. Hinterberger, H., Fässler, L., and Bauer‐Messmer, B. (2004) “From Hybrid Courses to Blended Learning: A Case Study”. ICNEE, Neuchâtel, Switzerland. Kear, K. and Heap, N. (2007) “Sorting the Wheat from the Chaff: Investigating Overload in Educational Discussion Systems”. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 23(3):235–247. Morris, L. and Walker, D. (2006) CAA Sparks Chemical Reaction: Integrating CAA into a Learning and Teaching Strategy. Evaluation of the Use of the Virtual Learning Environment in Higher Education across Scotland. QAA Scotland. Motteram, G. and Forrester, G. (2005) “Becoming an Online Distance Learner: What Can Be Learned from Students Experiences of Induction to Distance Programmes?” Distance Education 26(3):281–298. Rosenberg, M. (2001) E‐Learning: Strategies for Delivering Knowledge in the Digital Age. Columbus: McGraw Hill. Sharpe, R., Benfield, G., Roberts, G., and Francis, R. (2006) The Undergraduate Experience of Blended e‐Learning: A Review of UK Literature and Practice. The Higher Education Academy. Stubbs, M., Martin, I., and Endlar, L. (2006) “The Structuration of Blending Learning: Putting Holistic Design Principles into Practice”. British Journal of Educational Technology. 37 (2), 163‐175. Weller, M. (2007) “The Distance from Isolation: Why Communities Are the Logical Conclusion in e‐Learning”, Computers & Education, 49 (2): 148‐159. Wu, J., Tennyson, R., and Hsia, T. (2010) “A Study of Student Satisfaction in a Blended e‐Learning System Environment”. Computers & Education 55(1):155–164.

509

Foundations for the Reconceptualization of the e‐Textbook David Lamas, Terje Välyataga, Mart Laanpere, Veronika Rogalevich, Arman Arakelyan, Sónia Sousa and Ilya Shmorgun Tallinn University, Institute of Informatics, Tallinn, Estonia david.lamas@tlu.ee terje.valyataga@tlu.ee mart.laanpere@tlu.ee veronica.rogalevitch@tlu.ee arman.arakelyan@tlu.ee sonia.Sousa@tlu.ee ilya.shmorgun@tlu.ee Abstract: An ever‐widening range of digital artifacts is transforming our daily lives as we communicate, locate, play, learn, and much more with and through them. As the inherent ubiquitous computing model allows us to do all that while moving across a wide variety of settings and contexts, thus, resulting in a new sense of self among users, it challenges our understanding of how humans interact with and through computers. Where previously there was one technology, one application, one user, all packaged into one fairly stable unit, there is now an ever‐changing configuration of technologies, applications and actors. Within this context and in an abbreviated way, this article lays the foundation for an ongoing project that aims to re‐conceptualize the e‐Textbook as aggregations of both professionally authored and user‐contributed content accessible through a wide range of artifacts by tackling the challenges of designing for ubiquitous computing interaction through the understanding of how humans interact with and through ecologies of artifacts while pursuing their activities; and by advancing technology‐enhanced learning experiences, moving away from the replication of traditional practices and models.

Keywords: e‐textbook, ubiquitous computing, learner‐centred technology‐enhanced learning

1. Introduction Learning processes in the 21‐st century are becoming more diverse and interactive. New pedagogical models and methods increasingly aim to address students’ different learning styles and needs. However, traditional study models using textbooks (mostly paper‐based) are not up to par and teachers lack instructional resources to adequately and impartially foster the success of every student. A recent research initiative of the Book Industry Study Group (BISG) called Student Attitudes Toward Content in Higher Education shows that current textbook approaches are not meeting the needs of students and so recommendations were drawn that point for a need to seek for alternative content and pedagogical strategies possibly build on the emerging digital artifact ecologies (Paxhia, S. 2011). Unfortunately, The first generation of electronic textbooks cannot be considered successful as, although digital, they are but downloadable versions of traditional textbooks or digitally generated static e‐book files (epub, pdf), usually monolithic and not at all interactive but, most of today’s students do not read textbooks regularly (most fit into the description of the YouTube Generation) and they prefer short pieces of content, preferably in different media (videos, texts, pictures) and actively follow peer recommendations, on top their teachers’ suggestions (Miller, B. and Ranum, D. 2012). Thus, the idea of using digital learning resources conveyed by an open source publishing system could be the basis of a next generation of textbooks, which are dynamic, flexible, personal, with aggregated content consisting of relevant learning objects such as files (texts, slides, pictures, video, audio), simulations or visualizations, single web sites or articles (for instance in Britannica Online or Wikipedia), interactive content packages (tutorials, e‐courses), which can be created by different authors. As these digital learning resources are also multimodal, communication can be promoted not only through text but also and simultaneously images, audio and other media. These digital learning resources can also be highly interactive and invite the user not just to address questions and assignments but also to actively contribute towards the content of the textbook (CNICT 2013).

510

David Lamas et al. The above outline scenario requires, however, careful design built upon sound theoretical frameworks. Over section 2, the main contributions from theory are address and finally the projects overall and specific goals are identified in section 3.

2. The project There were so far, two major research waves in human‐computer interaction. A first one steaming from engineering and human factors with an emphasis on optimizing human computer a befitting, and the second rooted in cognitive science, with an increased emphasis on theory and on what is happening not only in the computer but, simultaneously, in the human mind (Bannon 1986). In the third wave, the usage context and application types are broadened and intermixed as computing artifacts spread from the workplace to our homes, pockets and culture (Bertelsen 2006). New elements of human life are included in the human‐ computer interaction such as culture, emotion and experience and methodologically the commitment to usability was partially dropped in favor of a more exploratory approach where interaction designers seek insight from usage through observation and probing. Still, as stated by Bødker (2006), rather than departing from the second wave theoretical frameworks, the third would probably benefit from a more direct conciliation with the theories and methods of the second generation and this is the setting within witch the challenges of designing for ubiquitous computing interaction. Recent attempts to tackle this challenge include, for instance, the work by Jung and Stolterman (2012) on digital form and materiality, Beckhaus, Brugger and Wolter (2012) work on artifact maps, and the results reported by Bødker and Klokmose (2012) on the dynamics of artifact ecologies, however there is still much to be done on the validation and articulation of these research and design lens hence this being one of the goals of this proposed project. The need to moving away from replicating traditional classroom‐based teaching practices and knowledge transmission model is triggered by the fact that, although in recent years academic publishers have started to follow the phenomenon of extensive digitalization in all human areas by converting school textbooks into an e‐ textbook as an electronic form of the textbook (sometimes with a few extra interaction options) that can be read digitally on a computer screen, a special e‐book reader, a personal digital assistant (PDA), or even a mobile phone, so far the evolution of the textbook is exclusively triggered by economic forces from the printing press to digital production, and from digital production to digital distribution leaving teaching philosophy, pedagogical approaches and technological potential untouched. Being in an early stage, however, existing research on e‐textbooks has demonstrated that the experience of reading e‐books is not equivalent to reading textbooks (Woody et al. 2011) as studies on reading capability and behavior of e‐textbook demonstrate that learners do not prefer e‐books over textbooks regardless of their gender, computer use or comfort with computers being even more time consuming than the paper version. With respect to improved learner performance there are rather incompatible research results ranging from the claims that learners don’t perform differently or significantly better with current e‐textbooks to the claims that learners show higher motivation and better learning outcomes. The extent to which a learner gains the same pedagogical benefit from a printout of the digital content as from the content itself is the extent to which nothing of pedagogical value by using the Web has been done. Based on the research findings, e‐textbook needs to differ from that of a printed book to make for a more constructive user experience (Davy 2007; Butler 2009). As such, this project aims to take a step further and re‐conceptualize current e‐textbooks in a way that allows learner‐centered technology‐enhanced learning experiences through ubiquitous computing interactions. Our vision is not to engage learners only to meekly accept authoritative pronouncements, but we see learners themselves as a resource for creating artifacts as representations of knowledge. Delivered to a mobile device, such digital artifacts can also be fully portable. We see an adding a great deal of value to the evolution of a e‐ textbook by breaking down content into much smaller chunks, at least to the chapter level and preferably more granularly than that. The challenge for academic publishers is to make this content precisely relevant, authoritative, well presented and compliant to appropriate standards, easily accessible through repositories and easy to use, but also to find an appropriate business model.

511

David Lamas et al. Thus, the project emphasizes the necessity to involve all stakeholders, i.e. academic publishers with professional content authors, teachers and learners, but also involve expertise of technological know‐how; altogether while investigating e‐Textbook as aggregations of both professionally authored and user‐ contributed content accessible through a wide range of artifacts and technologies.

2.1 Trust as a key success factor Taking into account our cognitive abilities, the ways we perceive and handle information, go about our work and life, create and maintain social relations, use our cultural context and relate to our environment, we focus on Trust to bridge the gap between the various disciplines involved in this project. In detriment of the default mainstream attention given to technology we make am explicit effort in supporting and understanding the role of learners, teachers and content authors when learning, teaching, publishing with and through technology. These efforts build on the established relation between trust and academic performance, identified and build upon three main trust factors – trust in the teachers, the facilitators and colleagues, trust in the technical infrastructure, and trust in the overall environment (Sousa 2006).

2.2 Sustainability as desired characteristic Targeting a sustainable solution, we also aim to mitigate the social and economic effect of the re‐ conceptualized e‐textbook in its target groups, tackling the disposable technology paradigm (Huang & Truong 2008) and exploring the design of sustainable solutions that aim to utilize existing technology in easy reach of the constituents, minimizing the need for new artifacts. The research is thus directed towards providing for availability and accessibility of the proposed solution through a wide range of devices and services and adaptability of their functions for effective use in different educational and we explore a sustainable approach to the design of the e‐Textbook, drawing from the discourse of Sustainable Interaction Design (Blevis 2007).

3. Methodology Within the context depicted in the previous two section, the research questions are: 1. How do learners, teachers and authors currently relate to their artifact ecologies? What activities are pursued, what actions take place and how are they operationalized? Namely, how do learners exploit and manipulate the available mediators to support their knowledge building process? 2. How dynamic are learners, teachers and authors’ artifact and technology configurations and why? 3. What are the challenges and contradictions learners face while using their ecology of artifacts for knowledge building? 4. What efforts are needed to provide for the re‐conceptualized e‐Textbook? How may exploration of the intended use be supported, and how may some of the possible, yet less desirable uses are blocked? 5. What are the implications of the emerging patterns of interaction with and through artifact ecologies for the ubiquitous interaction design? 6. How to intervene into current classroom practices in order to create conditions for knowledge building processes facilitated by the re‐conceptualized e‐Textbook? 7. What are the appropriate business models and strategies for textbook publishers to provide professionally developed artifacts fitting the re‐conceptualized e‐Textbook premises namely, the principles of knowledge building pedagogy? In order to address the aforementioned research questions, the research group will address the three educational levels: primary, secondary, and gymnasium, using a range of research approaches comprising:

Ethnography (within the research context), accomplished through field notes, interviews, design probes, artifact map and contextual laddering, repertory grid technique and exploration tests, to partially address research questions 1, 2 and 3. The theory frameworks are Activity Theory (the human‐artifact model, appropriations) and Knowledge Building Theory (knowledge building pedagogy; learners as artifact creators and idea improvers as representations of knowledge).

Intervention research, accomplished combining elements of action research with the overall purpose of bringing about change by perturbing and intervening in the current learning and teaching practices in contexts attaining the envisioned e‐textbooks. Three interventions are planned to address questions 1, 3 and 6. The first aims to validate the emerging reworked conceptual framework of the e‐Textbook with a small group of target users (5 schools as forerunners in bringing in digital culture and mobile technology to

512

David Lamas et al. schools) using existing artifact ecologies. The second intervention focuses on further validation of the emerging conceptual framework (using the same 5 schools but also involving textbook publishers) using specially designed artifacts in addition to existing artifact ecologies. The third intervention focuses on a large scale setting, within which 20 schools will be participating using their existing artifact ecologies complemented with the digital artifacts design and developed by the research group. Field notes, interviews, surveys, digital traces, video‐recording are used. The theory framework is predominantly the Knowledge Building Theory (knowledge building pedagogy).

Field trials, focusing on having users use the artifacts’ prototypes and on collecting data through that being less concerned with adding additional evaluation layers to the prototype as such. Even though the intention is to log and gather use data, we do not foresee the addition of extra evaluation instruments to the prototype. This is primarily because we are concerned, in this stage of the process, with evaluating and exploring the general concepts of the proposed artifacts, rather than with narrow usability issues dealt with elsewhere in the design and development processes. This an openly interactive approach to field trials that also seeks insights into future use rather than just targeting the validation of previous design decisions thus data will also be collected through digital traces, design probes, repertory grid technique and exploration tests. Two interventions are planned, which run in parallel with the second and third interventions describe before. The field trials address questions 1, 2, 4 and 5 and the predominant theory framework is Activity Theory (the human‐artifact model, appropriations).

Ethnography (within the research group) accomplished through field notes taking, collateral artifact critique and designed artifact time‐based change visual analysis framed by the Form and Materiality lenses proposed by Jung and Stolterman (2012).

Delphi study, a structured elicitation technique used in this case for the systematic, interactive forecasting with a panel of experts (teachers, authors, publishers, students, technologists) for exploring their vision, critical issues and perceived limitations regarding the culture and processes related to technology‐ enhanced learning and teaching, in the context of the re‐conceptualization of the e‐Textbook.

The re‐conceptualization of what e‐Textbook should be and the design of the enabling digital artifacts build on the results of the ethnographic studies, intervention research, field trials, Delphi study and as well as on a technology survey to be deployed with the purpose of thoroughly depicting the current landscape of technologies potentially enabling the foreseen e‐Textbook (figure 1 illustrates the discover, design and deployment strategy of the project). 2013:,Discovery 1

2014:,Design 4

2015:,Delivery 3

Ethnography,(within,the,research,group) Ethnography,(within,the,research, context)

Delphi,Study,(1st)

Technology,survey

IntervenGon,(1st)

IntervenGon,(2nd)

Field,tests,(2nd)

Technical,infrastructure,and,range,of,digital,arGfacts

Field,tests,(1st)

IntervenGon,(3rd)

Delphi,Study,(2nd)

Training,and,disseminaGon,events

Other,disseminaGon,acGviGes

Figure 1: The discover, design and deployment strategy Finally, the presumed outcomes include concepts, design frameworks and technology. The expected conceptual outcomes are:

An updated frame of reference to analyse ubiquitous interactions (from research question 1, 2 and 5);

The e‐Textbook re‐conceptualized as an aggregation of both professionally developed and user‐ contributed content accessible through one’s range of artifacts (from research questions 1, 2 and 3); and

A business model for the publishing and distribution of professionally developed content (from research question 7).

The expected resulting design frameworks are:

513

David Lamas et al.

A frame of reference on how to approach ubiquitous interaction design challenges (from research questions 1, 2, 4 and 5); and

Guidelines for professionally e‐Textbook content development (from research questions 1 and 3).

The expected technological outcomes include:

The technological infrastructure enabling the foreseen e‐Textbook (from research question 4);

A range of digital artefacts to be used by learners, teachers and authors enabling the re‐conceptualized e‐ Textbook (from research questions 1, 2, 3, 4); and

A toolset, not necessarily developed from scratch, for publishers to facilitating the widening of their publishing media and distribution channels to cater for the e‐Textbook contents (from research questions 1, 2, 3, 4).

4. Closing remarks As such, the general goal of the project is twofold: on one hand we aim to advance interaction design and evaluation approaches by tackling the challenges of designing for ubiquitous computing interaction through the understanding of how humans interact with and through ecologies of artifacts when pursue their activities; on the other hand, the goal is to forge ahead on the design of learner‐centered technology‐enhanced learning experiences by moving away from replicating traditional classroom‐based teaching practices (Hedberg, 2006) and knowledge transmission model. In specific terms, we aim to re‐conceptualize the e‐textbook as aggregations of both professionally authored and user‐contributed content accessible through a wide range of artifacts by tackling the challenges of designing for ubiquitous computing interaction through the understanding of how humans interact with and through ecologies of artifacts when pursue their activities; and by advancing technology‐enhanced learning experiences, moving away from the replication of traditional practices and models.

References Bannon, L. (1986). From human factors to human actors: the role of psychology and human‐computer interaction studies in system design. In J. Greenbaum & M. Kyng (Eds) Design at work: cooperative design of computer systems table of contents, Erlbaum, pp. 25‐44. Beckhaus, S., Brugger, S. L., & Wolter, K. (2012). Collect and map it all: The artifact map, a tool for complex context analysis. In Proceedings of NordiCHI ’12, New York. Bertelsen O. W. (2006). Tertiary artefactness at the interface. In P. Fishwick (Ed) Aesthetic Computing, MIT press. Bødker, S. (2006). When second wave hci meets third wave challenges. In Proceedings of NordiCHI ’06, New York. Bødker, S., & Klokmose, C. N. (2012). Dynamics in artifact ecologies. In Proceedings of NordiCHI ’12, New York. Butler, D. (2009). The textbook of the future. NATURE 458(2). CNICT (2013) Quality Criteria for Digital Learning Resources. Norwegian Center for ICT in Education. [online] Available at: <http://iktsenteret.no/sites/iktsenteret.no/files/attachments/quality_criteria_dlr.pdf.> [Accessed 06 February 2013] Davy, T. (2007). E‐textbooks: opportunities, innovations, distractions and dilemmas. Serials 20(2). Jung, H., & Stolterman, E. (2012). Digital form and materiality: Propositions for a new approach to interaction design research. In Proceedings of NordiCHI ’12, New York. Miller, B. and Ranum, D. (2012) Beyond PDF and ePub: toward an interactive textbook. In Proceedings of ITiCSE '12. ACM, New York. Paxhia, S. (2011) The Challenges of Higher Education Digital Publishing. Publishing Research Quarterly, December 2011, Volume 27, Issue 4. Sousa, S., Hudson, B., and Lamas, D. (2006). Reflections on the influence of online trust in online learners performance. In eLearn 2006, Honolulu. Woody, W.D., Daniel, D.B., & Baker, C.A. (2011). E‐books or textbooks: Students prefer textbooks. Computers & Education 55.

514

E‐Learning of Highway Traffic Flow in Real Time Ren Moses Department of Civil Engineering, FAMU‐FSU College of Engineering, Tallahassee, USA moses@eng.fsu.edu Abstract: The goal of this project is to improve students’ understanding of the relationship between microscopic and macroscopic highway traffic flow parameters in real time through online transmission of data from advanced traffic management centers located across the United States to a computerized laboratory. The paradigm shift in the transportation community from building new roads to using advanced technologies is challenging universities to produce graduates who are proficient in the design and operation of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). The cornerstone of this e‐learning process is the innovative idea of Wireless Communications in Transportation (WCT) laboratory. The WCT laboratory is a multidisciplinary effort with a singular focus of educating undergraduate students – in sufficient depth and breadth – in the design and operation of diverse wireless communications systems to fulfill the needs of the transportation system. The objectives of the WCT laboratory are to: (a) provide a multidisciplinary environment for civil and electrical engineering students to interact on topics common to both fields of study, (b) teach students the technology, terminology, capabilities, limitations, and design requirements of wireless communications, and (c) to increase students’ proficiency in simulation, implementation, and experimentation of wireless systems that can be used to collect, disseminate, and support data transmission requirements to fulfill ITS user services and other transportation needs. Students use the proposed WCT laboratory to experiment with wireless communications devices using real time data collected through an instrumented vehicle and through online data links with various field equipment operated by local highway agencies. The use of real time traffic data enables students to learn how to perform Dedicated Short‐range Communication (DSRC) experiments which are typically applied in toll plazas; learning how to build automatic incident detection algorithm for urban freeways; and learning how to simulate real time traffic flow. In general, students are able to conduct experiments which relates to application of Intelligent Transportation Systems to monitoring, analysis, evaluation, and prediction of transportation system performance and behavior. Efforts are underway to formalize the establishment of a multidisciplinary course and integrate the course into the undergraduate curricula of both electrical and civil engineering disciplines. Keywords: traffic flow, wireless communications, e‐learning, intelligent transportation

1. Introduction There is a continued paradigm shift in the transportation community in dealing with social, economic, and environmental problems caused by increased vehicle‐miles of travel. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA 2012) statistics show that the annual vehicle‐miles of travel in the United States reached 2,967 billion in 2010. The NHTSA statistics further show that 32,885 people were killed on US highways in 2010. In addition to safety problems, the travel data also show economic cost of lost productive time and wasted fuel due to congestion. A mobility study conducted by the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI 2012) indicates that in 2011, an average commuter in the United States endured 34 hours of delay resulting in over $100 billion of lost productivity for the nation. Until recently, transportation planners and engineers dealt with these transportation problems by increasing capacity through new construction projects and retrofit programs. However, the concerns for urban sprawl coupled with the social, economic, and environmental costs discussed above, are forcing the transportation community to shift their focus from new construction to applying advanced computer, information, and communications technology to increase throughput of the existing transportation system. The term Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) was coined in 1994 to refer to the strategy of applying new technologies to make the infrastructure, vehicles, and the users work smarter. The U.S. Department of Transportation, which is leading the ITS efforts in the United States, divided ITS into six interlocking technology areas shown in Table 1 (ITS DOT Project Book, 1995).

2. Wireless communications: The backbone of intelligent transportation systems Closer examination of Table 1 indicates that the realization of the desired ITS user services would depend on data communications between various entities that interact on the transportation network. Thus, the nervous system of Intelligent Transportation Systems is a reliable communications system that facilitates real time (or near real time) information exchange and data transfer between these entities. Figure 1 depicts ITS data flows on a transportation network.

515

Ren Moses Table 1: Intelligent transportation systems (ITS) technology areas 1. 2.

3. 4.

ITS Technology Advanced Traffic Management Systems (ATMS) Advanced Traveler Information Systems (ATIS) Advanced Vehicle Control Systems (AVCS) Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO)

Advanced Public Transportation Systems (APTS)

Advanced Rural Transportation Systems (ARTS)

Its Purpose To monitor, control, and manage traffic on streets and highways. To provide real time, out‐of‐vehicle or in‐vehicle information to drivers regarding navigation and route guidance, motorist services, roadway signing, hazard warning, and other pertinent information. To aid drivers in controlling their vehicles particularly in emergency situations and ultimately taking over some or all of the driving tasks. To apply advanced technologies to the special needs of commercial vehicles including automated vehicle identification, location, weigh‐in‐motion, clearance sensing, record keeping, etc. To enhance the effectiveness, attractiveness, and economics of public transportation by improving traveler information, transit management, and electronic payment. To apply advanced technologies to the special needs of rural systems – including emergency notification and response, vehicle location, traveler information, etc.

Figure 1 shows that, in general, communications would occur (a) between the vehicle and the infrastructure directly or indirectly through roadside devices, (b) between the roadside devices and the infrastructure, (c) vehicle‐to‐vehicle, and (d) between the various components of the infrastructure. It is noteworthy that the communication can be one‐way or two‐way—for example, a communication system that delivers route guidance information to a vehicle could also be collecting traffic data using the vehicle as a probe. While it is clear from Figure 1 that a communications system based on wireless technology is an absolute necessity to transmit information between a mobile and a stationary platform, wireless communications could also provide a cheap and ubiquitous alternative to hard‐wired technologies (e.g. fiber optics) for communications between stationary platforms. For example, collection of traffic data from remote loop detectors could be cheaply implemented through cellular modems, spread spectrum radio or satellite links rather than trenching a fiber optic system to connect the loop detectors in the field to a Traffic Management Center (TMC).

Figure 1: The interconnect diagram for communications between ITS physical entities The importance of wireless communications in supporting ITS data flow requirements as illustrated in Figure 1 underscores the need to train students in the design and operation of wireless systems. Such training requires the establishment of an advanced laboratory in which students can conduct experiments related to wireless communications. For example, students will e‐learn how to perform Dedicated Short‐range Communication (DSRC) experiments which are applied in toll plaza, how to build incident detection algorithm, how to simulate real time traffic flow, etc. In general, students will conduct experiments which relates to application of Intelligent Transportation Systems to monitoring, analysis, evaluation, and prediction of transportation system performance and behavior.

3. Innovative e‐learning features of the WCT laboratory Based on a comprehensive literature review and to the best of our knowledge, the WCT laboratory would be the first of its kind in the United States. The uniqueness of this concept is based on its singular emphasis of teaching students the design and operation of wireless communications for transportation applications. To

516

Ren Moses make this conceptual framework successful, a number of innovative features are being contemplated for implementation:

3.1 Emphasis on multidisciplinary engineering education The paradigm shift of applying advanced computer, information, and communications technologies to solve transportation problems suggests that the future transportation engineer has to have technical skills some of which have not been traditionally offered by the civil engineering undergraduate education programs. Therefore, consistent with the expected changes in the transportation profession and the convergence of disciplines, this undertaking is a multidisciplinary effort by faculties of the Departments of Civil and Electrical Engineering. The faculty from the Department of Civil Engineering would bring to the WCT laboratory project an understanding of the challenges of collecting and disseminating information required to fulfill transportation needs. The faculty from the Department of Electrical Engineering would bring to the project an understanding of the diversity, capacity, constraints, and trends of wireless communications technologies. As the WCT laboratory continues to grow in future years, faculty from other disciplines such as computer engineering and industrial engineering would participate—reflecting the increasing interdisciplinary skill requirements for the future transportation engineers. The interdisciplinary nature of the laboratory will increase a number of multidiscipline students which will benefit from this project.

3.2 Transmitting real time, areawide, and continuous data to the WCT laboratory The improvements of communications technologies and the proliferation of Traffic Management Centers (TMCs) around the country are creating new avenues for improving students’ learning using real time, area wide, and continuous traffic data. There are three sources that will be utilized to transmit traffic information to the WCT laboratory to facilitate e‐learning: (a) through data collected by an instrumented vehicle, (b) through polling of field data collection devices, and (c) through data link with Traffic Management Centers.

4. Students e‐learning topics The topics that students are expected to learn will be divided into four categories:

4.1 Theory of wireless communications and operations Students would learn the available wireless technologies and their advantages over hard‐wired systems, capability and legal limitations, and the expected performance and management of wireless systems. Also, the students will be introduced to advanced techniques such as spread spectrum transmission, error control, encryption, data compression, and diversity receivers.

4.2 Wireless data collection Students would learn how to collect microscopic and macroscopic traffic data using wireless systems. In addition, students would learn wireless collection techniques for other data such as environmental and pavement data and inventorying of transportation systems. In the future, topics would be expanded to include collection of real time driver physiological and psychological data using wireless devices.

4.3 Wireless information dissemination Students would learn the design and operations of wireless systems for information dissemination to travelers before they start their trips or while en route. The GPS systems that the City of Tallahassee has installed in their commuter buses present opportunities for students to learn the design and operation of wireless systems that could give bus arrival/departure information at kiosks and at bus stops.

5. Summary This paper has presented a conceptual framework for improving the learning of highway traffic flow dynamics through online experimentation conducted in the proposed WCT laboratory. The new focus of applying advanced computer, information, and communications technology to increase throughput of the existing transportation systems around the world is challenging educators to produce engineers who can operate these systems. This challenge should be embraced by creating links between universities and highway authorities to facilitate traffic data transmission to specialized laboratories to enable students to undertake various

517

Ren Moses experimentations such as building congestion detection and mitigation algorithms. The e‐learning opportunities provided by such collaboration are limitless and can result in unlimited number of systems and products that would further improve surface transportation around the world.

References ITS America (2002). “National Intelligent Transportation Systems Program Plan: A Ten‐Year Vision”. Also available through http://www.itsa.org/ Accessed May 2004. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2012). “Traffic Safety Facts 2010,” U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C. Data accessed online December 2012 at http://www‐nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811659.pdf. Texas Transportation Institute (2012). “2011 Urban Mobility Report,” Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas. Data accessed online December 2012 at http://mobility.tamu.edu. U.S. Department of Transportation Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint Program Office (1995). US Joint Program Office for Intelligent Transportation Systems. Department of Transportation’s Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Projects Book. Washington, D.C. US Department of Transportation ITS Joint Program Office (1999). Building Professional Capacity in ITS: Documentation and Analysis of Training and Education Needs in Support of ITS Deployment, Washington, D.C.

518

An Exploration of e‐Learning Practices of Teachers at Selected Schools Osman Sadeck Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape Town, South Africa osadeck@pgwc.gov.za Abstract: Schools are acquiring technology and gaining access to digital products and processes at an exponential rate. In spite of the pervasion of technology, there appears to be an under‐utilisation or non‐adoption of the available tools and technologies for educational benefits. An overview of e‐learning publications appears to highlight drawbacks as opposed to advances. A general atmosphere of doom and gloom surrounds e‐learning. It is noted in literature that human, organisational and technical factors may be contributing reasons for failures. Access (or lack thereof) to technology is also forwarded as reasons for failures. However the availability or ownership of technology, and access to services, does not imply, nor guarantee usage. Whilst the tangible aspects of ICTs are visible, pedagogical use is not. Little is known from a positive perspective about the factors that contribute to e‐learning successes. This research seeks to explore and understand the deeper rationale that informs teacher’s e‐learning practices from a positive viewpoint: what teachers are doing; how they are doing it and why do they do it. The research proposes to achieve its objectives by looking at the phenomena through two lenses i.e. ‘What’ and ‘Why’. The ‘what’ lens will explore the operationalisation of e‐learning by focusing on methodologies employed. The ‘why’ lens will probe technology adoption, acceptance and use. The research design will employ a blend of qualitative and quantative approaches using inductive and deductive techniques. It will comprise of multi‐sited case studies. Data will be collected through document analysis, questionnaires, surveys and interviews. Analysis of data will be both factor and content. Teachers from primary and high schools make up the sample. Keywords: e‐learning practice; adoption; integration; use; models; integration

1. Introduction Main research question: What are teacher’s e‐learning practices: what are they doing, how are they doing it, and why do they do it? The extent of the culture of e‐learning across schools in the Western Cape is varied and the determinants of pockets of excellence of e‐learning practice have not been fully explored. At the core of the problem, it can be argued, is the question of what is e‐learning practice. The interplay among elements such as ICT adoption, integration of ICT into processes, and individual beliefs about learning and teaching are vital for gaining insight into e‐learning practices. An understanding of the underlying factors that prompt actions on the part of teachers needs to be understood. Such knowledge will enhance our understanding and provide new perspectives on the current e‐learning landscape. Hadley and Sheingold (1993, in Mumtaz 2000:326) state that “findings do not yield insight into the individual teacher’s learning process, including both the cognitive understanding of technology and teaching; and the sociocultural factors that have an impact on such success”. In this research e‐learning practice is taken as the integrative use of processes; products; systems; technology and services. Strydom and Thompson (2010:3) describe integration in two ways: as associated with ‘adoption’, and as ‘use’. Adoption is described on a four‐stage continuum as emerging; applying; infusing and transformational (UNESCO: 2002 in Strydom & Thompson, 2010). Use is distinguished as representational or generative (Hokanson and Hooper, 2000 in Strydom & Thompson, 2010). Investigative questions

Research question 1 ‐ What are teachers doing with technology?

Research question 2 ‐ How are they doing it?

Research question 3 ‐ Why do they choose to do it?

2. Aim To understand what teacher’s e‐learning practices are, and what motivates teachers in their uptake of e‐ learning. The focus is not on factors that inhibit adoption and, but on determinants that promote e‐learning practices.

519

Osman Sadeck

3. Theoretical framework Teachers Product Digital Content

Integration and Use Determines

Process Methodology

Depicts

Systems LAN, WAN, LMS

Practice

Technology Computer, TV, IWB, Tablets Services Cloud, Social Software

Technical Non-technical factors Adoption Uptake & Value

Leads to... Affects

Impact Could result in... Could Improve

Learning / e-learning

Figure 1: Conceptualisation of the research All does not seem to be going well with e‐learning at school level. Botha and Ford state that the “practical implementation of e‐Education has been a failure”. They maintain that the “sporadic use of computer technology does not give… the prolonged exposure that is needed…to integrate ICTs into teaching and learning practice” (2010:1‐2). “In South Africa effective and efficient use of ICTs is yet to be realised in many schools” (Bytheway, et al. 2010). In JISC (2009: 5), access “does not mean that technology is always used to its best advantage, either by teachers or learners”. Anecdotally, at this stage the landscape shows varied usage patterns. Many teachers do not use technology because of lack of access. The WCED uses its Moodle LMS in a f2f/online mode for ICT integration training. Teachers appear to use data‐projectors, interactive white boards and networked computers more than other technologies. There does not appear to be significant use of tablets or cell‐phones for teaching and learning. Methodologies appear to mimic traditional teaching, and appear representational. Use of drill and practice software and internet searches is a common integration model. There does not appear to be much integration of digital resources into lessons. Educational Landscape The South African Department of Education, through its policy on e‐Education, has signalled its intention to progress education through the use of ICTs ‐ “e‐Education revolves around the use of ICTs to accelerate the achievement of national educational goals” (DOE, 2004: 14). A range of innovative technology and connectivity pilot projects and training in the use of technology and computer literacy typified the start of e‐Education in South Africa.

4. Literature review It is crucial that a narrow view of what constitutes e‐learning is not held since there are a range of understandings of e‐learning. Hansson (2006) notes that the adoption of technologies has created new opportunities for interactions in teaching and learning. Consequently teachers have to re‐think their approach to teaching and learning “well beyond the traditional transmission model” (Laurillard & Mc Andrew, 2003: 82).

520

Osman Sadeck Learning methods are referred to as “ways through which instructors deliver instructions and learners access these instructions” (Kahiigi, 2007:77‐88). Learning models can be described both at the “level of pedagogical principles and at the level of detailed practice in implementing those principles” (Mayes & Freitas: 2004). Methods are described as: traditional learning; e‐learning; blended learning and informal learning (Kahiigi et al: 2007). At the pedagogical level Cronje’s (2005: 8‐9) shows that learning can take place via four domains: instruction; construction; integration or injection. Detail in implementation strategies include: problem and project based learning; drill and practice and flipped classrooms. The foci of strategies include discussions; dialogue and individual or group task. Methods, pedagogical underpinnings, strategies and foci provide a framework that shapes e‐learning models and approaches. Several models including, Laurillard’s conversational model and Britain and Liber’s Framework will be used during analysis. The use of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) will provide a useful guide to the logical stages of the progression of adoption over time. In this research, the researcher will concentrate on Rogers' "Diffusion of Innovations" (1960, 1995) and Hall and Loucks' (1979) Concerns‐Based Adoption Model, as well as, studies into ‘Theory of Reasoned Action’ (TRA); ‘Theory of Planned Behaviour (TBP) and ‘Behavioural Intent (BI). Rogers work will be useful in understanding the importance of the ‘self’ in decision making processes. The Concerns‐ Based Adoption Model) (CBAM) of Hall et al. (1987) provides a sound framework towards understanding reasons for practice.

5. Research design The research is underpinned by an interpretivist philosophy in order to gain rich insights into the complex issue of e‐learning practice at school level. A blend of qualitative and quantative approaches, explanatory and exploratory inquiry and, inductive and deductive techniques will be employed. According to Neuman (1997:30), some techniques are more effective when addressing specific kinds of questions and topics and, van der Merwe (1996:279) maintains that “induction and deduction should not be regarded as mutually exclusive”. According to Saunders et al. (2003:90), to understand why something is happening is deductive. The research will consist of multi‐sited case studies. It will be a cross‐section comprising a purposeful selection of schools and teachers so as to include the peculiarities of individual cases. (Huysamen, 1994: 168). The research will be a snapshot in time. Data will be generated through surveys, interviews and questionnaires. Two methods will be used to collect data: document analysis and personal interaction with the participants in the research. A general survey will be used to seek out emerging patterns in current e‐learning practices and will inform any adjustments to the questionnaires and interview questions. Semi‐structured interviews will be used to elicit insight into the adoption, acceptance and use patterns of respondents. Document analysis will look at models, theories and frameworks related to e‐learning and Technology Acceptance Models (TAM). Data will be subjected to factor and content analysis. Factor analysis will be used to provide a profile of factors that will emerge in the research. Qualitative data will be subjected to content analysis. A series of categories, codes and themes will be used for both factor, and cluster analysis. The research is based on the following assumption:

The sample is representative of examples of e‐learning practice.

That there is a high level of homogeneity amongst the sample.

That the responses will resonate with e‐learning practices.e‐learning practice is the unit of analysis and the unit of measure the individual teacher.

The sample will comprise teachers at selected high and primary, public and private schools from urban and rural areas. These choices are to provide a spread of institutional context; include the implementation of e‐ learning across grades R to 12.

521

Osman Sadeck The envisaged sample at this stage constitutes 8 schools and 16 participants. The size of the sample is based on the understanding of data saturation, which is likely to occur early with large samples in qualitative research. Guest et al. (2006, in Mason, 2010) maintain that “a high level of homogeneity among the population” may be sufficient “to enable development of meaningful themes and useful interpretations".

References Botha, A. & Ford, M., 2010. A Pragmatic Framework for Integrating ICT into Education in South Africa. IST‐Africa Conference Proceedings. Cunningham, P. & Cunningham, M. (Eds) Bytheway, A.,Sadeck, O., Dumas, C., Chigona, W., Chigona, A., Mooketsi, B., Fanni, F. Rega, I. 2010. Integrating ICTs into the classroom: assisting teachers in disadvantaged primary schools. In eSKills Summit 2010. Cape Town, 2010. Cronje, J.C., 2005. Paradigms Regained – Towards Integrating Objectivism and Constructivism in Instructional Design and the Learning Sciences. Cronje, J.C., 2007. Who killed e‐learning? [Online] Available: http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/Cronje101/Who_killed_e‐ learning.pdf [Accessed 2011]. de Freitas, S. & Mayes, T. 2004. JISC e‐learning Models Desk Study. Stage 2: Review of e‐learning theories, frameworks and models. Department of Education ‐ South Africa, 2004. White Paper on e‐Education. Government Gazette, 2 September 2004. Huysamen, G.K., 1994. Methodology for the social and behavioural sciences. 1st edition. Southern Book Publishers (Halfway House) JISC, 2009. Effective Practice in a Digital Age. A guide to technology‐enhanced learning and teaching. Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). www.jisc.ac.uk/practice Kahiigi, E.K. et al, 2008. Exploring the e‐learning state of art. Electronic Journal e‐learning Volume 6 Issue 2 2008 (77 ‐ 88). Laurillard, D. and McAndrew, P. (2003) “Reusable Educational Software: a Basis for Generic Learning Activities”, in Littlejohn, A. ed., Reusing Online Resources – a Sustainable Approach to e‐learning, London, Kogan Page Mason, M., 2010. Sample Size and Saturation in PhD Studies Using Qualitative Interviews. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research. Volume 11, No. 3, Art. 8 – September 2010. Mumtaz, S., 2000. Factors affecting teachers’ use of information and communication technology: a review of the literature, journal of information technology for teacher education. 9:3, 319‐342. Neuman, W.L., 1997. Social research methods, Qualatative and Quantative Approaches. Third edition. Allyn and Bacon, Needham Heights, USA. Rogers' "Diffusion of Innovations" (1960, 1995). (http://education.ed.pacificu.edu/bcis/workshop/adoption.html ‐ viewed 15 January 2010) Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A., 2003. Research Methods for Business Students. 3rd ed. Essex: Pearson Education Limited. Van der Merwe, H., 1996. The research process: problem statement and research design. Garbers, J. G. (Editor). Effective research in the human science. JL Van Schaik Academic, Pretoria. Wilson‐ Strydom, M. & Thomson, J., 2010. Understanding ICT integration in South African Classrooms. IST‐Africa Conference Proceedings, 2010. Cunningham, P. & Cunningham, M. (Eds)

522

Knowcations: A Meme‐Based Personal Knowledge Management System‐in‐Progress Ulrich Schmitt Knowcations, Botswana schmitt@knowcations.org Abstract: The short paper and poster introduces Knowcations®, an innovative approach to Personal Knowledge Management (PKM) which stands for a concept and support‐system‐in‐work to aid teamwork, life‐long‐learning, resourcefulness, and creativity of individuals throughout their academic and professional life and as contributors and beneficiaries of organisational performance. The idea originated during the author’s PhD studies in the early 90s and the resulting prototype has been continuously expanded to integrate additional uses and functionalities. Due to advances in standards‐based rapid database development platforms as well as cloud/hosting services, the transformation into a marketable application across multiple platforms and environments has become a viable opportunity for innovation. The PKM system employs the concepts of Dawkins’ ‘Memes’ and Koch’s ‘Business Genes’. The Work‐in‐Progress Short Paper/Poster follows the logical steps of a system user to take and shows the interaction with the outside world to result in a complete feedback loop based on Boisot‘s I‐Space Model. Keywords: personal knowledge management system (PKMS), knowledge management (KM), content management, Boisot’s information space model, memes and business genes, knowledge economy

1. Personalising knowledge management and life long learning The concept of the Creative Class has been introduced by Florida as a rising and driving force of economic development. Estimated to be one third of the workforce in the United States, their economic function is to create new ideas, new technology, or new creative contents as well as to engage in complex problem solving that involves a great deal of independent judgment and requires high levels of education or human capital (Florida, 2012, p. 8). The corresponding shifts in the spheres of work and the changing needs for education and self‐development demand better support services, but adequate responses from the academic and application world are still lacking: “About 100 years ago, higher education restructured to meet the needs of the industrial age. It has changed little since, even as the internet has transformed life. Another revolution is needed to modernise universities st and prepare graduates for a 21 century working environment. We continue to prepare students as if their career path were linear, definite, specialised and predictable. We are making them experts in obsolescence. We are doing a good job of training them for the 20th century.” (Davidson, 2011) Digital technology “has not yet achieved significant improvement in the quality and scale of education, nor any radical change in the model of education. […] On that analysis, our education systems are doomed to irrelevance and inefficiency, unable to even begin to meet the challenges of the 21st century, because they cannot rethink themselves fast enough.” (Laurillard, 2009, p. 323) How can the growing creative class of knowledge workers be better served? In the past decade, ICT’s value for money has increased significantly in regard to hardware, broadband services and pc/cloud‐based systems. In addition, standards‐based rapid database development platforms and cloud/hosting services provide a constructive environment for innovative applications by creative entrepreneurs. It is time to take advantage of these developments by employing grass roots, bottoms‐up, lightweight, affordable, personal applications rather than the top‐down, heavyweight, prohibitive institutional approaches and centralized developments which are neither capable to painlessly interconnect nor to ensure flawless migrations in case users might like to change ICT environments. But, even if ‘personalising’ has been suggested as one of the potential remedies, it is also mostly in the realm of big‐system‐add‐ons; e.g. (Harley, 2009) (Iiyoshi & Richardson, 2009) (Kahle, 2009). With a focus on personalising Knowledge Management (KM) Levi has taken a different turn: “Without denying the importance of collective strategies and the shared visions that support them, I believe that social knowledge management should be thought of as an emergent level based on the creative conversation of many individuals’ Personal Knowledge Management [PKM]. One of the most important functions of teaching,

523

Ulrich Schmitt from elementary school to the different levels of university, will therefore be to encourage in students the sustainable growth of autonomous capacities in PKM. And this personal management should be conceived from the outset as the elementary process that makes possible the emergence of the distributed processes of collective intelligence, which in turn feed it.” (Levi, 2011, pp. 113‐116). Levi not only positions PKM right in the heart of education but also scales its potential far beyond authors who have limited it to sophisticated career and life management with a core focus on personal enquiry (Pauleen & Gorman, 2011, pp. 9‐10) or see it just as a means to improve some skills or capabilities of individuals, negating its importance relating to group member performance, new technologies or new business processes (Davenport, 2011, p. 169).

2. Ground‐breaking personal knowledge management systems (PKMS) ‐ five vital provisions To put Levi’s notion into action, novel PKM Systems ought to cater for five vital provisions:

Digital personal and personalised knowledge (Extelligence) is always in possession and at the personal disposal of its owner or eligible co‐worker, residing on personal hardware and/or personalised cloud‐ databases.

Contents are kept in a standardised, consistent, transparent, flexible, and secure format for easy retrieval, expansion, sharing, pooling, re‐use and authoring, or migration.

Information and functionalities can continually be used without disruption independent of changing one’s social, educational, professional, or technological environment.

Collaboration capabilities have to be mutually beneficial to facilitate consolidated team and enterprise actions that convert individual into organizational performances.

The PKMS design and complex operations are based on a concept, functionalities, and interventions which are clearly understood and are painlessly applied in practice.

Underpinning this notion is the idea “that the knowledge and skills of a knowledge worker are portable and mobile. Unlike manual workers, they have numerous options on where, how, and for whom they will put their knowledge to work” (Rosenstein, 2009, p. 53).

3. Introducing the Knowcations PKMS prototype Attending to the complexities encountered, an earlier paper (Schmitt, 2012) has argued for advancing user‐ friendly PKM Systems as a valuable resource for people empowerment and social transformation and to successfully compete in a dynamically changing future of work. A second paper (Schmitt, 2013) has followed up on this notion by imagining a possible conceptual corset for getting closer to this vision and positioned PKMS in regard to organisational KM and existing standard applications (pkm.knowcations.net). The Knowcations® system adopts the concept of ‘memes’ (Dawkins, 1976) or ‘business genes’ (Koch, 2001), see Figure 1 for definitions. In the meme world, information ‘consumes’ the attention of its recipient/host and is either multiplied or lost in the process (but not consumed like physical goods). A ‘Knowcations’ user takes on the role of the host with a limited attention span and memory, but with the potential cognitive capacity to single out and understand a meme, to elaborate on it, and to create groups of memes from diverse sources, mutually supporting each other for further replication. However, this activity does not only take place mentally but supported by the PKMS functionalities and the more reliable storage and retrieval facilities of the underlying knowledge and database. The poster (thumbnail in Figure 4) tracks the user in this process and visualizes his/her interactions using the Information Space Model (Boisot, 2004). In Boisot's I‐Space, knowledge assets can be located within a three dimensional space, an extension of the SECI Matrix (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). Furthermore, a "Social Learning Cycle" (SLC) is proposed that uses the I‐Space to model the dynamic flow of knowledge through a series of six phases depicted in Figure 2.

524

Ulrich Schmitt

MEMES [Dawkins, Bjarneskans, Collis]

are (cognitive) information-structures that evolve over time through a Darwinian process of variation, selection and transmission. They are able to self-replicate utilizing mental storage in human hosts and to influence their hosts behaviour to promote further replication. Memes are virtual, and have no intentions of their own, they are merely pieces of information in a feedback loop which are encoded in vehicles for transmission between human hosts; this loop facilitates their continued replication as mental copies with their longevity being determined by their environment. Memeplexes are groups of memes mutually supporting each other and and replicating together to benefit from competitive advantage.

BUSINESS GENES [Koch]

are the building blocks of know-how, skills and technology in the broadest sense.

They comprise economic information that needs to find a commercial vehicle before it can attain its potential and deliver a valuable product or service.

[As the origin of economic life,] they seek to replicate as widely as possible by incorporating themselves into what we may loosely call commercial vehicles: inanimate things like buildings, machines, software, factories, offices, trucks, and products; but also living things like people, teams, corporations, services, and economies".

Figure 1: Memes and business genes

Figure 2: Nonaka’s SECI‐matrix versus Boisot’s information‐space model

4. Following the personal knowledge management cycles In portraying the I‐Space, the poster depicts a complete feedback loop covering user interactions with the system (steps 1‐6) and with the outside world (steps 6‐1). Each step is briefly described by referencing Knowcations’ meta‐entities (sources, actors, profiles, uses, and projects), presented in form of their iconic symbols and related screenshots of the prototype. The usually displayed I‐space coordinates (Figure 2) have been adjusted to produce a more easy‐to‐follow learning cycle and process flow (Figure 3). In addition, figure 3 describes the process nodes and shows how they align to Probst’s Eight Building Blocks of Knowledge Management (Probst, 1998). The clockwise process flow depicts a theoretical idealistic chain of events. The reality is characterized by repeatedly moving back and forth, a heuristic iterative practice of continuous improvement until a satisfactory draft of the intended documentation or presentation has been accomplished. The steps (see connectors between nodes in Figure 3) are:

8‐1 Scanning for Selection.

525

Ulrich Schmitt

1‐2 Meme Infection and Codification.

2‐3 Variation via Abstraction.

3‐4 Competition for Utilization

4‐5 Selection & Contextualizing

5‐6 Transmission for Diffusion.

6 (state): Diffusion by Publishing.

6‐7 Absorption with Variations.

7‐8 Competition for Impact.

Probst’s 8 Building Blocks of KM Public memes in concrete packages of meme-plexes are heard or seen and infect user’s brain to overcome ‘ignorances’. Selected meme-plexes & (new) memes are converted/codified as atomic meme structures and stored with references.

3 Knowledge Acquisition

Atomic (new) memes are linked to abstract pre-defined types and user-defined (sub)topics to facilitate future replication.

6 Knowledge Preservation

Scripts are composed by selecting, replicating, and sequencing competing (new) memes from the accumulated pools.

1 Knowledge Goals

To integrate the (new) memes in context, original message might have to be adjusted via copying and variation.

4 Knowledge Development

Finalised script stays on as digital source or converted into electronic/paper diffusion version with fewer causative links.

5 Knowledge Distribution

Newly codified insights are applied, producing new learning experiences, knowledge is absorbed, becomes 'tacit'

Abstract knowledge becomes embedded in concrete practices, for example in artefacts, rules or behaviour patterns.

1-8

On a meta-level, users and peers engage in feedback and progress reports by applying the functionalities available.

Memes

2 Knowledge Identification

n Co

t ac str

titio pe com

r n fo

a imp

Di ffu s

cre

Collaboration across Users ed

sc an ni

fo r

se le ct io

Un n

di ff

us ed

research by user

d re irec ad t f er ee s db or a lis ck te fro ne m rs

Legend

se co lectio nte n xtu an alis d ing

5 7 Knowledge Use

8 Knowledge Measurement

sion diffu for sion mis s n tra

4 competition for utilisation

straction variation via ab

Boisot’s I-Space Model

Figure 3: Knowcations® processes in Boisot’s I‐space model and Probst’s 8 building blocks of KM The feedback loop implies that Dawkins’ Concept of Memes applies to the outside world (steps 6‐1) where a meme in order to survive has to be encoded in an information‐carrying medium (e.g. books, spoken word) to facilitate the passing between peers from brain to brain via learning and imitation. Furthermore, it also applies at the system level (steps 1‐6) where the memes identified as well as innovative memes thought up by the user are constantly competing for the user’s limited attention span to be memorised until recorded in either pure, pre‐edited, or already re‐combined versions. Thus, by digitally capturing, referencing, classifying, and visualising basic information units, the system allows us to recall, sequence and combine stored units with our own newly inspired meme creations (‘nemes’) for integration in any type of authoring and sharing activity one would like to pursue. As a result, the user obtains the means to retain and build upon knowledge acquired in order to sustain personal growth and facilitate productive contributions and collaborations between fellow learners and/or professional acquaintances. The steps between states 3 to 6 in Figure 3 represent these distinctive internal ‘memetic’ process phases which operate on the stored contents of the knowledge bases (also labelled as Extelligence by Stewart and Cohen).

5. The road ahead Further Papers are under way to elaborate on the areas of impact (capacity development, tertiary institutions, knowledge economy, e‐learning, and leadership) as well as the conceptual, technical and design aspects of the system. To transform the prototype to a commercially viable PKM software application will take less than two years; the activities to set up a start‐up company in Southern Africa are proceeding. The next phase will incorporate system testing and opportunities to disseminate research regarding usability and the value added.

526

Ulrich Schmitt

Figure 4: Thumbprint of poster

References Boisot, M., 2004. Exploring the information space. University of Pennsylvania. Davenport, T. H., 2011. Personal Knowledge Management and Knowledge Worker Capabilities. In: Pauleen & Gorman, eds. Personal Knowledge Management. Davidson, C. N., 2011. So last century. Times Higher Education, Issue April 2011. Dawkins, R., 1976. The Selfish Gene. Paw Prints. Florida, R., 2012. The Rise of the Creative Class ‐ Revisited. Harley, D., 2009. Why Understanding the Use and Users of Open Education Matters. In: Opening up Education. MIT Press. Iiyoshi, T. & Richardson, C. R., 2009. Promoting Technology‐enabled Knowledge Building and Sharing for Sustainable Open Educational Innovations. In: Opening up Education. MIT Press. Kahle, D., 2009. Designing Open Educational Technology. In: Opening up Education. MIT Press. Koch, R., 2001. The Power Laws of Business. Nicholas Brealey. Laurillard, D., 2009. Open Teaching: The Key to Sustainable and Effective Open Education. In: C. Foundation, ed. Opening up Education. MIT Press. Levi, P., 2011. The Semantic Sphere 1. Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H., 1995. The Knowledge‐Creating Company. Oxford University Press. Pauleen, D. J. & Gorman, G. E., 2011. The Nature and Value of Personal Knowledge Management. In: Pauleen & Gorman, eds. Personal Knowledge Management. Probst, G., 1998. Practical Knowledge Management ‐ A Model That Works. Prism, Second Quarter, Arthur D. Little, pp 17‐ 29. Rosenstein, B., 2009. Living in More Than One World. Schmitt, U., 2012. Knowcations ‐ The Quest for a Personal Knowledge Management Solution. 12th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Knowledge Technologies. i‐Know '12, Graz, Austria. Copyright 2012 ACM 978‐1‐4503‐1242‐4/12/09. Schmitt, U., 2013. Knowcations ‐ Conceptualizing a Second Generation Personal Knowledge Management System.

527

Leveraging Engagement and Participation in e‐Learning with Trust Sonia Sousa and David Lamas Tallinn University, Estonia sonia.sousa@tlu.ee david.lamas@tlu.ee Abstract: This article describes a project that builds on authors previously body of knowledge on Trust and uses it to leverage higher levels of engagement in e‐learning contexts. The presented research aims to investigate on unobtrusively strategies to evaluate a toolset of Trust indicators that monitor trust levels thus facilitating the deployment of trust level regulation interventions. So far results include project concepts, the design, develop and implementation of tools and indicators to measure trust in e‐learning formal contexts. The Project underlying hypotheses aims in real time offering possible future directions to the study of the roles of learning engagement, participation and overall sustainability to support self‐directed and sustainable learners activities that imply a strong need for cooperation between learners and learning systems and technologies, and between learners through systems and technologies in the context of open learning scenarios. Keywords: trust, social learning, learning engagement, electronic participation

1. Introduction The increasing pervasiveness of computing systems again raises the challenge of focus on humans, beyond the pragmatic usefulness and usability dimensions, when developing interactive systems and technologies. As mentioned by Jaimes (2007), computing is at one of its most exciting moments, playing an essential role in supporting human activities, facilitated by the growing availability of services, devices and interaction modalities. Moreover, users were brought from the periphery to the center of the emerging global ubiquitous computer with the evolution from the large‐scale computing to the contemporary pervasive and ubiquitous computing interaction paradigms through the successive waves of the personal, networked, collaborative, mobile, augmented and virtual reality interaction paradigms. Notwithstanding, the computing community still designs and develops systems and technologies without fully taking into account our cognitive abilities, the ways we perceive and handle information, go about our work and life, create and maintain social relations, use our cultural context and relate to our environment (Jaimes, 2007). Examples abound in the literature on Human‐Computer Interaction (HCI) (Norman, 2004), Computer‐Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) (Preece and Shneiderman, 2009), User‐Centered Design (UCD) (Keates, 2011; Kuniavsky, 2003) and e‐learning (Sousa and Lamas, 2012, Sousa and Lamas, 2011) As an approach to address the highlighted shortcomings, Human‐Centered Computing (HCC) is an emerging field that aims at bridging the gap between various disciplines involved in the design and development of systems and technologies that support human’s activities, which focus on all aspects of humans with systems, humans with technologies, humans with their environment, humans with humans integration. Within this landscape, we focus on leveraging HCC with Trust. This rationale is built on the belief that a thorough leveraging Human‐Centered Computing Trust we are able to intervene as interaction facilitator construct aiming that way to foster higher degrees of human integration with and through technological artifacts, systems and their shared environment thus leading to higher levels of engagement, participation and overall sustainability. Following section establishes the relevant background on Trust and its interrelation with Human‐Centered Computing.

2. Fundamental notions on trust Trust is a complex concept with multiple dimensions and there is much work and progress made to understand it concepts and implications on human relations on areas like sociology, psychology, economics, management science and technology. From a sociological perspective Trust is seen as a reflection of behaviors, choices and decisions (e.g. Gambetta, 1998); for psychologists, trust is seen as an attitude or intention (e.g. Erikson, 1968); on the other hand social psychologists interpret trust as a interpersonal phenomenon (e.g. Meyerson, 1996), and economists see it as a commitment in a form of a rational decision (as a game) (Bachrach et. al., 2007). For scholars in management science, trust has been recently connected with the notion of docility introduced to

528

Sonia Sousa and David Lamas describe the tendency of people to trust social channels as a major basis for making decisions (Weber, 2003). Trust has also been approached in HCI, in CSCW and other computing systems and technologies contexts (Constantine, 2006). In the field of Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL), a significant relation between Trust and academic performance was identified building on three trust factors: trust towards teacher and facilitators and learner’s interactions, trust towards the online learning environment and Trust towards the technological infrastructure. Further, a socio‐technical model of trust was developed which depict trust as a construct informed by attributes such as trust predisposition, reciprocity, predictability, honesty, benevolence, and competence, determining the extent to which one relates with one’s social and technical environment. This model builds on what one perceives to be trustworthy and is influenced by a number of factors such as the history of participation and perceptions of the communication medium and of other users. Using this model as a research lens, relations were found linking trust to openness and sharing (Sousa et.al, 2011; Sousa and Lamas, 2011), to privacy (Lorenz, et. al., 2012) and to collaboration (Sousa and Lamas, 2012) in online learning environments. On the literature we further read that Trust influences the degree of engagement and commitment towards specific activities; and the degree of peer engagement and willingness to establish communication. The herein proposed research project builds on this body of knowledge to leverage Human‐ Centered Computing, perceiving Trust as an interaction facilitator construct.

2.1 Research focus and scope One contribution towards perceiving Trust as an interaction facilitator construct is to design, develop and evaluate a toolset to monitor trust levels thus facilitating the deployment of trust level regulation interventions. The underlying hypotheses is that real time monitoring of self and third party trust levels can in fact be used to trigger interventions designed to regulate (moderate, improve, recover) trust levels to adequate standings. Thus, as on the design, development and evaluation of tools to monitor trust levels based on the current understanding of the construct, the research questions are: RQ 2.1 What data can be used to monitor trust? RQ 2.2 How often should data be sampled to generate robust trust indicators? RQ 2.3 How should data samples be collected taking into account that the impact of the sampling process in the generation of confidence indicators should be minimized? RQ 2.4 What metrics should be used to express trust levels? RQ 2.5 How should trust indicators be interpreted? To construct the measurement instruments, we detained first our efforts on addressing above research questions, aiming in the end to be able to answer the following question, how to moderate Trust in a specific context, i.e how to moderate learners predisposition to trust fostering them towards enaging in sucessful interactions. We focus our framework of reference on the previous described proposed socio‐technical model of Trust in online learning context(see figure 1), which represent the interceptions of Human‐Computer Trust Components and the dynamic nature of Trust in relationships (Sousa and Lamas, 2012). As a results we design a multi‐dimensional trust scale to quantify and evaluate learners commitments and willingness to learn, their rational and irrational trust perception towards the mediators, the technology and the learning environment. Trust indicators

Motivation Trust Predisposition

Intentions to relate

Willingness

Competency Performance

Predictability

Ratinal perception

Attitudes Behaviours

Emotional perception

Expectations

Reciprocity

Benovelence Commitments Honesty

Figure 1: The socio‐technical model of trust in online learning context

529

Sonia Sousa and David Lamas The observed case study: two distinctive courses were observed, one that is completely delivered online named “Foundations of Human‐Computer Interaction” and another partially delivered online (with 3 face‐to‐ face meetings) named “Evaluating the User Experience. Both courses have similar pedagogical and technical scripts, same learning timeframe, similar type of assigments and are content related. The full online course includes a saple of sixten (16) students and the other includes a sample of ten (10) students, they are all students at Institut of Informatics at Tallinn University, in Estonia. The implementation: study iplementation include two major procedures, a survey instrument and an additional collecting data sample gather from interviews to teachers, transcription of online sysncronous and asyncronous communications and interactions. Data is collected biweekly started in the end of January and ends in the beginning of May. The survey is conducted online by using an open source web application called LimeSurvey and used Likert scale as well as open‐ended answers. Survey aim to explore students’ changes on emotions, commitments and intentions when learning. Additional collected data aim to explore students’ behaviours and patterns. Refining the scales: factors collected in the survey included question that addressed students predispositions, rational feelings and emotional perceptions in two main dimentions: (1) information about students’ level of commitements and willingness towards the learn activities; (2) second indicators measure students trust predisposition towards three main factors, the course mediators, course artifacts and course learning environment; (3) third indicators measure students’ ration perception towards competence, predictability and reliability (4) fourth and last indicators measure students irrational percetions on reciprocity and benevolence and and honesty. Additional data collected aims to be correlate with above information so we can obtain a better understanding of the results.

2.2 Validating the instrument When submiting the final version of this paper, the following steps will be already accomplished, we hope them to present answers to all our research questions special in what regards understanding what is the needed collection sample interaction, what metric express better students trust predisposition variations throughout time and how should this indicators be interpreted. We also will have in mind that there is three main moments as crutial for analysis this learning interactions and commitements: a initial moment (the articulation), that help to create learners' initial trust presisposition towards the course. A second moment in time (the connecting), ensure the success of the interaction and the success of working commitments. This moment provide necessary group support and continuity for the interaction process and the motivation to be positively engaged in the working task. The end moment (the reflection) happens after the course fulfilment, when students re‐evaluate their experience and decide how this will effect future relations (Sousa and Lamas, 2012).

2.3 Closing remarks This work's major contributions are towards facilitating the understanding of the role of Trust in moderating the interactions between the learner and the learning technologies, and the human mediation between students, teacher and institution through systems and their learning technologies. Thus intercept areas of knowledge such Human‐Centered Computing (HCC) and Technology enhanced learning and is expected to point possible future directions of study on the potential role of trust to leverage realtions and rethinking the different points of views on the design of adaptive complex and dynamic learning process and artifacts presented in today digital knowledge environments which support self‐directed and sustainable learners activities.

References Bachrach, Michael; Guerra, G. and Zizzo, D. (2007). The self‐fulfilling property of trust: an experimental study. Theory and Decision, pages 349–388. Constantine, L. L. (2006). Trusted interaction: User control and system responsibilities in interaction design for information systems. In CAiSE, pages 20–30.

530

Sonia Sousa and David Lamas Gambetta, D. (1998). Trust making and breaking co‐operative relations. In Gambetta, D., editor, Can we trust trust? pages 213–237. Basil Blackwell. Jaimes, A., Gatica‐Perez, D., Sebe, N., and Huang, T. S. (2007). Guest editors’ introduction: Human‐centered computing– toward a human revolution. Computer, 40:30–34. Keates, S. (2011). Teaching the next generation of universal access designers: a case study. In Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Universal access in human‐computer interaction: design for all and eInclusion ‐ Volume Part I, UAHCI’11, pages 70–79, Berlin, Heidelberg. Springer‐Verlag. Kuniavsky, Mike. 2003. Observing the User Experience: A Practitioner’s Guide to User Research. Morgan Kaufmann. Lewicki, R. and Bunker, B. (1996). Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships. In Kramer, R. and Tyler, T., editors, Trust in organizations: frontiers of theory and research, page 429. SAGE publications Inc., California. Lorenz, B., Sousa, S., and Tomberg, V. (2012). Privacy awareness of students and its impact on online learning participation — a case study. In Proceedings of the OST’12: Open and Social Technologies for Networked Learning. Springer Verlag. in press. Norman, D. A. (2004). Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things, volume 2006. Basic Books. Preece, J. and Shneiderman, B. (2009). The reader‐to‐leader framework: Motivating technology‐mediated social participation. AIS Transactions on Human‐Computer Interaction, 1(1):13–32. Sousa, S., Laanpere, M., Lamas, D., and Tomberg, V. (2011). Interrelation between trust and sharing attitudes in distributed personal learning environments: The case study of Lepress PLE. In Leung, H., Popescu, E., Cao, Y., Lau, R., and Nejdl, W., editors, Advances in Web‐based Learning, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 72–81. Springer Verlag. Sousa, S. and Lamas, D. (2011). Trustful Online Learning Communities. In: Annual: Proceedings of ICEL 6th International Conference on e‐Learning: Proceedings of ICEL 6th International Conference on e‐Learning. (Eds.)Balcaen, P.. Kelowna, Canada: Academic Publishers, 2011, 508 ‐ 512. Sousa, S. and Lamas, D. (2012). Trust as a leverage for supporting online learning creativity – a case study. e‐learning Papers, (30):1–10. Weber, L. R. and Carter, A. (2003). The social construction of trust, volume 33. Springer.

531

Facilitating a Constructivist Learning Environment Through Chat Room Dialogue Kristian Stewart University of Michigan‐Dearborn, Dearborn, USA kdstew@umd.umich.edu Abstract: This paper presents the results of an action research project which focuses on chat room communication at a metropolitan university in the United States. Students in a first year composition course were tasked with taking lecture notes during class solely utilizing online course software, specifically the chat room feature. An analysis of the chat transcript revealed how students organically situated knowledge construction in a virtual context. Examining the individual and group thought processes of the students, along with the questions that they asked, provided the instructor with an avenue for extended classroom conversation and future lesson planning. Additionally, student feedback and participation in the chat room has established the parameters for an extended research project into the tenants of constructivism in virtual learning environments. Keywords: first‐year writing, chat room communication, constructivism

1. Introduction The chat room feature, one element of the online Course Tools (Ctools) platform that compliments all courses in the writing department, was a feature rarely utilized in my classes. Classes met in person, and Ctools provided students with a virtual space to deliver assignments or to collect readings. However, all of this changed when a student confided that she was diagnosed with a life‐threatening illness during the middle of the term. She did not wish to drop the class and still wanted to attend while undergoing treatment. In fact, it was the student’s wish to check into the class from the hospital via the chat. Wishing to assist the student in staying active in the course, I requested that four students (who had laptop computers) take lecture notes in the chat room on the days the student would miss. Although this student was not physically in the room, she asked questions with the assistance of other students and participated in the class virtually.

2. Area of focus What was revealed through an investigation of the chat room transcript directly relates to the Grounded Theory approach in qualitative social sciences research. Grounded Theory, as written about by Neff (1998), examines multiple data collecting events until relationships materialize and a theory emerges. Examining the transcript and noticing how students shared facts, accessed prior knowledge, negotiated disequilibrium, and collaborated in the assembling of ideas exposed constructivism unfolding, organically, in the chat room. This led to the following questions:

With what purposes are students writing in the chat room?

How can instructors facilitate a constructivist learning environment through chat room dialogue and activities?

If students were already participating in authentic, reflective learning practices, a critical consideration of how a chat room could aid the writing practices of first‐ year composition students was warranted.

3. Review of related literature For the understanding of this paper, constructivism can be defined using the work of Jean Piaget (1896‐1980). Piaget’s focus on theory making, invention, and the ways to understanding through awareness of how knowledge evolves (as found in Papert, 2002), effectively mirrors the process of writing and what skills those in composition studies hope students obtain. A working definition of constructivism in the first‐year composition classroom could include a commitment to active learning which encourages students to critically reflect and modify their writing practices as they foster deep understanding of conceptual, content knowledge. Occupying what Maness (2008) refers to as a middle ground between writing and speaking, the chat room component in an online environment represents one mode of computer mediated communication that includes blogs, Wikis, and email. As a learning device, empirical research and theoretical papers in the sphere of chat communication have uncovered findings in the areas of linguistics, research in educational technology,

532

Kristian Stewart and writing studies. Commonalities which connect themes from these disciplines include how chat room instruction benefits second language learners (Clark‐Cummings, 2004; Lai & Zhou, 2006; Nowrozi, 2011), collaborative writing practices (Cargile‐Cook, 2002; Turner‐Hawley, 2012; Sanders, 2006), and the implications of the chat room as a new language which further establishes chat room communication as a contemporary mode of literacy (Sanders, 2006; Savas; 2011). Ultimately, how technology is changing instruction is further confirmed by the work of Harrè (1984) in regard to the Vgotsky Space model (in Boling, 2008). Vgotsky Space provides a framework for how knowledge is contextualized from the private (self) as it transitions to learning in collaborative and public contexts. According to Boling (2008), Harrè’s work has challenged educators to think about the movement of learning, especially in this technically advanced age, which can no longer be linear. As learning takes shape in virtual domains and converges between multiple viewpoints and stakeholders, pedagogy must evolve with it. Thus, creative pedagogy that connects students to the places in which they learn requires innovative, forward‐ thinking curricular practices.

4. Context of study This study commenced on the campus of a metropolitan university in the larger Detroit, Michigan area. The class was comprised of 22 freshman writing students (N=22), more female (n=13) than male (n=9), and of mixed ethnicities and languages, with 11 students who reported speaking English as their second language. Students selected this class due to a standardized placement exam that tested their writing ability before the onset of classes. Goals of this course included writing by means of inquiry, rhetorical awareness, and reading critically and thoughtfully a range of texts.

5. Data collection and analysis Data was collected through an analysis of 113 chat room messages logged from the beginning of the semester until just after midterms, which included the first note‐taking activity. Not every student left messages in the chat; however, seven (n=7) consistently posted on a weekly basis. The corpus was read in its entirety and coded by means of direct student quotes (lexical and diction choices), questions posed, and the topic of dialogue thread students presented in their posts. The predominating themes found across the lines of the transcript included the social construction of knowledge, the chat as a place to find information, and acquiring agency as it applies to ownership of learning. Investigating the chat provided a glimpse into how students were thinking about the class simply by scrutinizing the words they provided and the rhetorical choices they selected. The Social Construction of Knowledge Students utilized the chat as a collaborative learning community mostly independent of teacher instruction. As an example, while taking lecture notes, one student abruptly stopped typing in order to clarify a point made in the lecture. Her question was immediately answered by a few other students, thus paving the way for student collaboration in the social production of knowledge. Student question and answer sessions in the chat revealed both the gaps in their understanding of the content and offered insight as to what lecture or topical points resonated and connected each to the instruction. Meaning‐ Making and Information Many students perceived the chat as in informal domain for writing. The chat’s main function serving to provide answers regarding web links and basic writing questions, what I deem “surface information”. Meaning, this chatter was for information gathering purposes only and not an attempt to critically assess or discuss what students were actually composing in class. As an example, students would place the ellipsis marks in the middle of a sentence in order to leave space for other students to assist them in figuring out an answer. This is the linguistic move of incorporating a conversational ‘pause’, and it proved to be effective means for inviting other students to enter into a dialogue or to gain information.

533

Kristian Stewart Student Agency & Ownership Student agency took shape through the chat room dialogue, particularly in terms of exercising voice and ownership over the learning environment. As students chatted, those who were shy or perhaps unwilling to speak in front of an entire class had a place where they did not have to compete with other students for ‘talk time’.

6. Plan of action and intervention For constructivism to be effective, the instructor must set the stage of the classroom environment through thoughtful consideration of how students are constructing knowledge. By evaluating the chat data, I was able to examine the ways in which course content was negotiated and conceptualized by my students and implement an intervention. The treatment of the chat space, specifically in regard to facilitating a location where students could enhance the scholarship already taking place in the chat, became the priority for the remainder of the semester. My task was to foster learning events that would recreate the learning already underway in the chat room. As examples, I relocated our class novel discussion to the chat. I also assigned students the roles of book ‘facilitators’ and ‘respondents’, each part with its own responsibility in regard to inviting students to virtually participate. Next, I encouraged students to make use of the chat area for peer editing small chunks of text and to vet ideas for papers. Students were also persuaded to “throw questions to the chat” before asking my advice. Creating this policy immediately cut down on the amount of emails I received requesting editing suggestions. Mainly, how I approached the chat through my dialogue and endorsement as an extension of the classroom both improved the quantity of the dialogue threads and the messages the posts carried. Lastly, it must be mentioned that writing in the chat space was not connected to a grade. I aspired to maintain the informal environment the chat room provided while assembling activities that invited students to take ownership over their learning.

7. Results, reflections, and future research implications At the end of the semester, I once again read the chat transcript, but this time in its entirety. Students logged 434 messages in total, 321 written after midterms. I grouped the messages by themes using the same protocol as mentioned above. All of the students participated, due to the book talk, and book conversations in the chat were more developed and nuanced than they were in our normal class sessions. I also discovered that student agency was greatly increased after moving activities into the chat. Students were not afraid to ask or answer questions regarding correct writing styles, grammar, or the conventions associated with genre. This was radically different from class where students rarely would raise their hands if ‘grammar and mechanics’ comprised the daily topic. In short, the chat provided a dynamic and vibrant space where students could be empowered to participate in a way that was meaningful to them. Additionally, students synthesized course materials and participated in deeply analytical conversations that stemmed from classroom conversations. Particularly, two students asked detailed questions about the Islamic faith to one Muslim student, adding his answers to enhance their own awareness of his religion. I wondered if this kind of conversation could have taken place face to face, or if the environment provided an area where complex issues could be discussed. Conversations like this were exercises in self‐directed learning, reflection, and meaning‐making as students critically assessed their prior knowledge and used it to forge new understandings. The chat room platform as a means to accessing an equitable education for students traditionally marginalized, however, is the most important lesson I learned from this project. It has already been established that for second and or foreign language learners, online literacy events can offer an educational environment that does not leave these students feeling excluded due to their linguistic backgrounds (see Clark‐Cummings, 2004). However, other student populations could gain from the diversity of learning experiences a chat room provides. I had one such student. He treasured the chat, speaking more in chat both on topic and off, simply due to a stuttering issue which left him voiceless during our normal class time. When

534

Kristian Stewart this student attempted to talk in class, other students finished sentences for him. Not once did this happen in the chat room. Hence, it is worth investigating if online environments can provide instruction in a setting which can also serve to demystify power structures that have been reinforced, historically, in traditional classrooms. Lastly, monitoring the chat room offered a way to check student comprehension as students wrote in a low‐ stakes atmosphere free from the demands of the traditional classroom. In short, the chat room became a collaborator in the learning which allowed students to go beyond a top‐down paradigm and to construct knowledge on their own terms. Incorporating chat room activities into first‐ year composition classes is an additional way to authentically reach students where they are both writing and thinking. More importantly, the chat room allows students to become producers of knowledge rather than simply consumers of course content.

References Boling, E. (2012) “Learning from Teachers’ Conceptions of Technology Integration: What do Blogs, Instant Messages, and 3D Chats Have to Do with it?”, Research in the Teaching of English, vol. 43, no.1, pp 74‐100. Clark‐Cummings, M. (2004) “’Because We are Shy and Fear Mistaking’: Computer mediated Communication with EFL”, Journal of Basic Writing, vol. 23, no. 2, pp 23‐48. Cook‐Cargile, K. (2002) “Layered Literacies: A Theoretical Frame for Technical Communication Pedagogy”, Technical Communication Quarterly, Winter, pp 5‐39. Lai, C and Zhao, Y. (2006) “Noticing and Text‐Based Chat”, Language, Learning, and Technology, vol.10, no. 3, pp 102‐120. Li, Z. (2012) “Application of Online Multimedia Courseware in College English Teaching Based on Constructivism Theory”, English Language Teaching, vol. 5, no. 3, pp 197‐201. Maness, J. (2008) “A Linguistic Analysis of Chat Reference Conversations with 18‐24 year –old College Students”, The Journal of Academic Librarianship, vol. 34, no. 1, pp 31‐38. Neff, J. (1998) “From a Distance: Teaching Writing on Interactive Television”, Research in the Teaching of English, vol. 33, no. 2, pp 136‐157. Nowrozi, V. (2011) “The Rationale for Using Computer Mediated Communication to Develop Communicative and Linguistics Competence in Learners”, English Language Teaching, vol. 4, no.3, pp 200‐205. Papert, S. (2002) “Jean Piaget”, The Constructivist, Spring, pp 19‐26. Sanders, R. (2006) “A Comparison of Chat Room Productivity: In Class Versus Out of Class”, CALICO Journal, vol. 24, no. 1, pp 59‐76. Savas, P. (2011) “A Case Study of Contextual and Individual Factors that Shape Linguistic Variations in Synchronous Text Based Computer Communications”, Journal of Pragmatics, vol. 43, pp 298‐313. Turner‐Hawley, K. (2012) “Digitalk as Community”, English Journal, vol. 101, no. 4, pp 37‐42.

535

536

Late Submission

537

538

Does Assessing e‐Skills Competence at an Open Distance Learning, Higher Education Institution Matter? – A Case in Point Jabulisiwe Mabila, Sam Ssemugabi and Helene Gelderblom School of Computing, University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa mabiljp@unisa.ac.za ssemus@unisa.ac.za geldejh@unisa.ac.za Abstract: Computer literacy or e‐skills is one of the recommended competencies for graduateness besides analytical, problem solving, writing skills, social awareness and responsibility skills. The purpose of this research was to investigate the necessity for e‐skills assessment of first year university students at an open distance learning institution. The study used an online simulated e‐skills assessment to determine the performance of the students and categorize them using a digital proficiency framework. The e‐skills assessment consisted of simulated questions relating to the use of Microsoft Word documents, PowerPoint presentation, Microsoft Office Excel as well as e‐mail and Internet use. The students were categorized based on their performance in the online assessment according to an e‐skills proficiency framework with four levels, namely digital awareness, digital literacy, digital competence and digital expertise. Questionnaires were also used to gather information on two dimensions of the participants’ perception. Firstly, their perception of their knowledge of of MS Word, Excel, Powerpoint as well as Internet and e‐mail use. The second dimension was their perception of the accuracy of the online assessment to evaluate their e‐skills. Participants’ performance in the e‐skills assessment demonstrated that while some users were proficient and can be categorized as digital experts, others lacked the most basic skills required to use computers and were classified in the digital awareness category. The contribution of this paper is to highlight the diverse e‐skills competencies among students entering an open distance learning university and its implications. The findings of this study are relevant to e‐Learning designers, academics and education policy makers.

Keywords: open distance learning (ODL), learning management system (LMS), e‐skills, information and communication technology (ICT)

1. Introduction Information and communication technology (ICT) has become central to knowledge production, dissemination, sharing and application in higher education (PF for DE, 2012). Web knowledge and computer literacy levels of tertiary students influence their performance on the LMS. Distance education seeks to expand provision of higher education to large numbers of students affected by work commitments, socio‐economic or geographical factors, for whom, full‐time education may be inappropriate. Environmental dynamics among students entering tertiary education affect students' online practices and literacy development. ICT skills or electronic skills (e‐skills) have been found to be an important factor for the learning of students. One of the main objectives of a comprehensive open learning and distance education institution, such as the case in point, is to address the needs of a diverse student profile by offering relevant learner support, facilitated by appropriate information and communications technology.

2. Related literature Rapid development of information technology and electronic communication is pervasive and ICT skills need to become core graduate attributes that university students develop in order to successfully participate in today’s global economy. Learning Management Systems (LMSs) are also becoming ubiquitous at universities around the world (Coates, James & Baldwin, 2005; Lonn, Teasly & Krumm 2011). In this section we describe the e‐skills categories used in the research, how e‐skills relate to graduateness and how it can be assessed.

2.1 E‐skills categories Related research of e‐skills among university students includes that done by Van Biljon and Pretorius (2009) who investigated the implications of usability and learnability in LMSs. They used a screening questionnaire for their research, and rated participants according to their Web browsing skills. The questionnaire also captured computer experience, and, particularly, Internet experience. They then classified participants into two categories, expert and non‐expert. The non‐expert category included novice and intermediate users. Based on the participants’ performance on tasks on the LMS, they compared the ICT skills of the students. They

539

Jabulisiwe Mabila, Sam Ssemugabi and Helene Gelderblom concluded that ICT skills among the students vary, and that ICT skills influence usability of the LMS to the point where a severe lack of ICT skills can render the LMS inaccessible. In a diverse, multi‐cultural open distance learning environment, users’ computer and Web skills vary. This is because learning is a process that depends on features such as the student’s previous experience, motivation and learning strategies (Som Naidu, 2010). Our efforts to learn in a particular situation are partially determined by our confidence in our ability to successfully perform a particular task (Greene, Miller, Crowson, Durke & Akey, 2004). In open distance education the quality of student learning is significantly dependent upon effective assessment of student’s prior knowledge (Bolt & Graber, 2009). Responsible open admission promotes equity of access and the provision of appropriate student support interventions aimed at bridging the gaps in students’ academic readiness for higher education. Responsible open admission provides for the assessment of students’ level of academic preparedness, so that appropriate support systems can be designed for students who need help in addressing academic skills gaps (Unisa ODL Policy, 2008). Appropriate learner support can only be provided when relevant information is available.

2.2 E‐skills as part of core graduate attributes Computer literacy or e‐skills is one of the recommended competencies for graduateness besides analytical, problem solving, and writing skills; social awareness and responsibility (Swanepoel, 2012).Miliszewska (2008) considered the skills required by university graduates to successfully participate in today’s global economy. She noted that ICT skills and digital literacy, unlike information literacy, have been largely overlooked in Core Graduate Attributes (CGA) policies. Miliszewska observes that the rapid development of information technology and electronic communication is pervasive and nascent and as such graduates require ICT skills as core graduate attributes. Distance education is a set of methods or processes for teaching a diverse range of students located at different places and physically separated from the learning institution, their tutors/teachers as well as other students (Unisa ODL policy, 2008). It is a multi‐dimensional concept aimed at bridging the time, geographical, economic, social, educational, and communication distance between student and institution, student and academics, student and courseware and student and peers (ibid). Open distance learning focuses on removing barriers to education and providing flexibility of learning. It is characterized by student‐centeredness and provides student support in its learning programs. Technology enhanced teaching, particularly in ODL, should be guided by the appropriateness for the student profile. Research into students’ first‐year university experiences suggests that students’ perceptions during the transition period in the first semester are critical in their decision to continue or discontinue tertiary studies (Pitkethly & Prosser 2001). This also provides a critical insight into the wider issues of student engagement, development and retention (Kantanis, 2000). Student retention and progression has long been identified as one of the most pressing concerns for higher education (Krause, 2005).

2.3 Context of the study This research was conducted at an open and distance learning institution in South Africa which has recently introduced compulsory online modules. ICT skills or e‐skills have been found to be an important factor for the learning of students to the point where a severe lack of ICT skills can make the LMS inaccessible. In a diverse, multi‐cultural Open Distance Learning (ODL) institution such as the University of South Africa (Unisa), users’ computer and Web skills vary significantly (De Kock, Van Biljon & Pretorius, 2010). Starting in 2013 every student registering for an undergraduate degree at the institution will be required to register for and successfully complete at least one compulsory online module. No printed study material will be provided for these compulsory courses and students will be required to participate in online learning activities and assessment. In relation to this, the questions that need to be answered are: How diverse are the e‐skills competence levels of students entering an ODL environment and what are the implications of this diversity?

2.4 Assessing e‐skills There is a need to develop advanced ICT skills in university graduates that will enable them to acquire and share information and knowledge. Higher education can play a role in the development of ICT skills. This research sought to answer the question of how diverse the e‐skills competence levels of students entering an

540

Jabulisiwe Mabila, Sam Ssemugabi and Helene Gelderblom ODL environment are and the implications thereof. In order to answer these questions the study assessed the e‐skills competence levels of first year students in an ODL university. In this study the e‐skills competence levels of the participants were assessed using an online simulated, competence‐based assessment. This tool assesses ICT skills in using Word, Powerpoint, Excel, the Internet and e‐mail. Based on the participants’ performance they were then classified according to their ‘digital proficiency’, which are the skills and knowledge that the participants demonstrated. The Digital Proficiency Framework (ECDL Foundation, 2011) was used. This framework has four levels of digital proficiency namely digital awareness, digital literacy, digital competence, and digital expertise. The Digital Proficiency framework used to classify the participants is shown in Table 1. Table 1: Digital proficiency framework (adapted from ECDL Foundation, 2011) Level of proficiency DIGITAL AWARENESS

Operating context Digital inactivity

DIGITAL LITERACY

Society

DIGITAL COMPETENCE

Work

DIGITAL EXPERTISE

Advanced job role

Characterized by

Applications and level of knowledge

Individual starting to interact with ICT

Lacks essential ICT skills such as concepts of ICT, using the computer and managing files Understands concepts of ICT ‐ can use the computer ‐ managing files ‐ using the Web in an effective and secure way ‐ can use e‐mail

Individual possesses essential ICT skills and can actively participate in society. Essential ICT skills herein include: Basic ICT concepts (Knows what is a computer, Internet, e‐mail). managing files Individual can operate a range of applications effectively in society and in the workplace Individual possesses a high level of ICT skills and can exploit the potential of ICT fully within specific advanced role, and can be regarded as an expert in the use of the particular application(s)

Can operate applications such as presentations, spread sheets and Word documents Individual has knowledge of specific applications and tools over and above those commonly required For example: Knows advanced concepts of applications such as presentations, spread sheets and Word documents. Can export and import files between different applications such as Excel and Word.

3. Research design The mixed method approach was used in this study. Thus the research involved collecting, analyzing data, integrating the findings, and drawing inferences using both qualitative and quantitative methods. Mixed methodologists advocate the use of whichever methodological approaches required to answer the research questions, whether quantitative, qualitative or both (Tashakkori & Cresswell, 2007). The study involved e‐skills assessment of 86 participants. Each participant was assigned a workstation and logged on to the online simulated competence based assessment using an individual username and password. The questions assessed computer skills in using Microsoft Word, Excel, Powerpoint, as well as e‐mail and the Internet. Computer skills such as creating folders, saving files in a specific folder were tested. There were 33 simulated questions, weighted according to their level of difficulty. An example is shown in Figure 1 to illustrate the simulation. The assessment tool kept track of all assessments that were completed or attempted. Question:

Proofing a Document Test Type: Simulated Weight: Level 1 Question: Use the Ribbon to Spell check the document. The word imposible is spelled incorrectly and should be corrected to impossible.

Expected Action/Answer: [1. Click the Review tab and then Click Spelling and Grammar. 2. Click on impossible in the Suggestions box and then, Click the Change button.]

Figure 1: Example of simulated e‐skills assessment question (Source: Masterskill, 2012 Participants in the research were first year university student registered for an End‐User Computing module at the ODL institution. The study took place at the ODL institution, at one of the university’s regional learner support centres which provides free access to computers and the Internet to registered students. Eighty six participants took part. Table 2 describes the profile of the participants.

541

Jabulisiwe Mabila, Sam Ssemugabi and Helene Gelderblom Table 2: Participant profile Age (years) <= 20 21‐30 31‐40 41‐50 >50 TOTAL

Gender Male 14 34 1 0 0 49

Female 12 21 3 1 0 37

TOTAL 26 55 4 1 0 86

Most of the participants (64%) were aged between 21 ‐ 30 years. 30% were younger than 20 years, and 6% were above 30 years of age. On completion of the e‐skills assessment each participant completed a questionnaire. The post‐test questionnaire used a five‐point Lickert scale to collect participants’ responses about their perception of their competence in using specific applications. These applications included MS Word, Powerpoint, Excel, e‐mail as well as the Internet. A second dimension of the questionnaire required the participants to indicate their perception of the accuracy of the simulated competence‐based assessment to actually assess their competence.

4. Results 4.1 Results of e‐skills assessment The e‐skills assessment results are shown in Table 3. Based on the mark obtained in the e‐skills assessment, the participants were divided into the four levels of digital proficiency defined in the Digital Proficiency Framework. The highest number of participants was in the Digital Literacy level which was 47%, and there were 28% in the Digital Competence level. 17% of the participants were in the Digital Awareness category and 8% in the Digital expertise level. Table 3: Results of e‐skills assessment Digital proficiency level Digital Awareness Digital Literacy Digital Competence Digital Expertise TOTAL

Number of participants 15 40 24 7 86

% composition per category 17 47 28 8 100

4.2 Validity and reliability of post‐test questionnaire Factor analysis was used to test the validity of the questionnaire, that is, the degree to which the test measures what it is designed to measure. The results of the analysis in this section were produced using the IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 20. In order for factor analysis to provide valid results, the number of respondents should be at least four times the number of variables, which are the questions or items to be factor analysed, which in this case it was and therefore sufficiently large enough means that the result of the factor analysis would provide valid results. It can be noted here that e‐skills assessment used was a standard test and its validity and reliability had been established outside of this research. The descriptive statistics of the post‐test questionnaire showed that most participants rated themselves highly on their ability to use the LMS, with a mean of 4.15. Ratings on their ability to use MS PowerPoint and Excel were lowest, with means of 2.60 and 2.95 respectively. Other mean ratings were Internet search (3.85), use of e‐mail (3.68) and basic computer skills (3.54). The accuracy of the assessment tool in assessing the participants ranged between 3.00 and 3.73. The highest rating of 3.73 was the accuracy of the tool to assess basic computer skills.

542

Jabulisiwe Mabila, Sam Ssemugabi and Helene Gelderblom An item analysis was performed on the questions of the two dimensions of the questionnaire. Dimension 1 was the students’ perception of their knowledge of MS Word, Excel, Powerpoint as well as Internet and e‐mail use. Dimension 2 was their perception of the accuracy of the online assessment to evaluate their e‐skills. Item analysis was used to determine the Cronbach alpha values, used to test the validity of the questionnaire. The output of the Reliability analysis of the items in the first dimension, in which participants assessed their skills in using the different applications, resulted in an overall Cronbach alpha value of 0.883. This reliability is adjudged as it is greater than the stipulated 0.8 value. The overall Cronbach Alpha value for the items in the second dimension in which each participant rated the accuracy of the online competence based assessment in assessing their skills was also adjudged at 0.887.

4.3 Discussion of results The results of the Barlett’s test of Sphericity, the Kaiser‐Meyer‐Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy (KMO) value and communalities indicated that the KMO value of 0.844 is reasonable to conduct Factor analysis. The p‐value of the Bartlett’s test was 0.000, which was below 0.05. This meant that it is significant, an indication of a strong enough correlation for performing Factor analysis on the questions in the questionnaire. All the Communalities of the questions in the questionnaire were acceptable. The values of the Kaiser‐Meyer‐Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequecy (KMO) for the two dimensions were 0.844 and 0.849. These values exceeded 0.6 and therefore indicate that there is sufficient correlation between pairs of items. The use of the simulated online competence‐based e‐skills assessment in categorising participants is therefore acceptable. The results show that there is a relationship between the two dimensions, that is, how the participants rate their e‐skills competence (Dimension 1), and how they perceive the simulated online competence‐based assessment to accurately assess their e‐skills (Dimension 2). The study indicated that a smaller percentage of the participants were in the Digital Expertise (8%) and Digital Competence (28%) levels. Most of the students, 47% were in the Digital Literacy level of the Digital Proficiency framework. Others however (17%), were in the Digital Awareness category, indicating a lack essential ICT skills. These ICT skills which these students lack include concepts of ICT, using the computer and managing files. As a result, these students’ learning could be negatively affected because ICT skills influence usability of the LMS to the point where a severe lack of ICT skills can render the LMS inaccessible (Van Biljon & Pretorius, 2009). This study shows the diversity of the e‐skills of first year students in an ODL environment. The study showed that the performance of first year university students in an online simulated assessment in the use of applications such as MS Word, Powerpoint, Presentations and Excel, e‐mail Internet and basic computer skills varies from those with very little ICT skills (Digital Awareness), right up to those who have highly developed ICT skills (Digital Expertise). The study, therefore, showed that the ICT skills of students of the first year university students at the ODL institution are diverse.

5. Conclusion Online courses should be designed with the diversity of the users in mind. The ICT tools should be designed in a way that supports students who have low competency levels, but without frustrating students with high levels of e‐skills. It is important to assess the ICT skills of students, especially at first year level. In distance education the quality of student learning is significantly dependent upon effective assessment of student’s prior knowledge. It is not surprising that student retention and progression has been identified as one of the most pressing concerns for higher education. The information that this study provides forms a basis for further investigation to enable ODL tertiary institutions to determine relevant intervening variables that can be utilized to assess and support students ICT skills more effectively. This can contribute to improving retention rates and ensuring that as many students as possible are equipped with essential ICT skills. These skills are essential in enabling students not only to use the Learning Management System but are core to graduateness.

References Bolt, S., & Graber, M. (2009). Factors influencing success in the delivery of business courses through web CT in remote locations: A case study of a collaborative partnership between Curtin University of Technology and the African Virtual University. Collected Conference Papers and Abstracts September 2009, pp. 95.

543

Jabulisiwe Mabila, Sam Ssemugabi and Helene Gelderblom Carabajal, K., LaPointe, D., & Gunawardena, C. N. (2003). Group development in online learning communities. Handbook of Distance Education, 217‐234. Cardoso, J. M. P. (2005). New challenges in computer science education. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 37. (3) pp. 203‐7. Creswell, J.W. 2009, Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, Sage Publications, Inc. ECDL Foundation, 2011, “Identifying Essential ICT Skills and Building Digital Proficiency Through Appropriate Certification”. Retrieved December 2012, Available http://www.ecdl.org/media/Digital_Proficiency_White_Paper1.pdf Garrison, D. R., & Baynton, M. (1987). Concepts: Beyond independence in distance education: The concept of control. American Journal of Distance Education, 1(3), 3‐15. Greene, B. A., Miller, R. B., Crowson, H. M., Duke, B. L., & Akey, K. L. (2004). Predicting high school students' cognitive engagement and achievement: Contributions of classroom perceptions and motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(4), 462‐482. Kantanis, T. (2000). The role of social transition in students': Adjustment to the first‐year of university. Journal of Institutional Research, 9(1), 100‐110. Krause, K. L., & University of Melbourne. Centre for the Study of Higher Education. (2005). The first year experience in Australian Universities: Findings from a decade of national studies Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne Melbourne. Masterskill, 2012. CompAssess 3.0 Computer Literacy. Masterskill. Pitkethly, A., & Prosser, M. (2001). The first year experience project: A model for university‐wide change. Higher Education Research and Development, 20(2), 185‐198. Poole, A., & Ball, L. J. (2006). Eye tracking in HCI and usability research. Encyclopedia of Human Computer Interaction,211‐ 219. Pretorius, M.C., Calitz, A. P., van Greunen, D (2005). The Added Value of Eye tracking in the Usability evaluation of a Network Management Tool. In: Proceedings of the 2005 Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists on IT Research in Developing Countries. White River. South Africa. Sibert, L. E., & Jacob, R. J. K. (2000). Evaluation of eye gaze interaction. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 281‐288. Sithebe, C. D., & Myburgh, F. Methodologies used for the development of myUnisa in an open source environment. Swanepoel, M., “Are academics prepared for graduateness”. Retrieved April 2012. Available http://www.unisa.ac.za/default.asp?Cmd=ViewContent&ContentID=26015. Tapper, J. (1997). Integrating online literacy into undergraduate education: A case study. Higher Education Research & Development, 16(1), 25‐40. Unisa Strategic Plan (2010) University of South Africa. Van Biljon, J., & Pretorius, M. (2009). Usability of learning management systems: Do information and communication technology skills widen the gap. IADIS e‐LEAR IG, 247‐254. Winfield, W., Mealy, M., & Scheibel, P. (1998). Design considerations for enhancing confidence and participation in web based courses. Yin, R.K. 2009, Case study research: Design and methods, Sage publications, INC.

544