Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282703310
Teaching research methodology in an online ODL environment: strategies
followed and lessons learnt
Article in South African Journal of Education · January 2015
DOI: 10.20853/29-2-469
CITATIONS
2READS
1,374
5 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Mental Health of University Students During COVID-19 View project
Public Policy View project
Llewellyn Ellardus van Zyl
Eindhoven University of Technology
95 PUBLICATIONS 488 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Martin Sadiki
University of South Africa
2 PUBLICATIONS 2 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Sanet Van der Westhuizen
University of South Africa
26 PUBLICATIONS 292 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Llewellyn Ellardus van Zyl on 31 October 2018.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
56
ISSN 1011-3487© Unisa Press
universityof south africa
teACHInG ReseARCH MetHoDoLoGy In An onLIne oDL enVIRonMent: stRAteGIes FoLLoWeD AnD Lessons LeARnt
M. de Beer*Department of Industrial and organisational Psychology e-mail: [email protected]
S. C. van der Westhuizen*Department of Industrial and organisational Psychologye-mail: [email protected]
N. N. Bekwa*Department of Industrial and organisational Psychologye-mail: [email protected]
M. Petersen-Waughtal* Directorate: Curriculum and Learning Developmente-mail: [email protected]
L. E. van Zyl*Department of Industrial and organisational Psychologye-mail: [email protected]
south African Journal of Higher educationVolume 29 | number 2 | 2015pp. 56–81
57
teaching research methodologyDe Beer et al.
M. Sadiki*Department of Industrial and organisational Psychology e-mail: [email protected]
* university of south Africa, Pretoria, south Africa
ABstRACtthis article provides an overview of an open and distance learning (oDL) honours online research methodology module. the module was developed to address the requirements of the Department of Higher education and training (DHet) for the new Programme Quality Mix (PQM) honours degrees. this semester module involves 15 active weeks of learning, culminating in the submission of a Portfolio of Evidence summative assessment task. Specific features of the module are described to illustrate how teaching the content was approached in an oDL context. the aim of the approach followed was to enhance student motivation, while maintaining consistent progress in achieving the required learning outcomes throughout the semester. Initial results and student feedback are presented.
Keywords: open and distance learning, online teaching and learning, research methodology, postgraduate students
IntRoDuCtIonTechnology impacts on all spheres of life – including teaching. It has become a core element of online teaching and learning in particular, and its impact on the educational domain (Schober et al. 2006, 73), especially in open and distance learning (ODL) contexts, is undeniable. In ODL, the aim is to open the world of higher education (HE) to more individuals by bridging the distance created by communication difficulties, economic, educational, geographical and social factors and time. It aims to bring together students and the higher education institutions (HEIs), students and lecturers, students and their courseware (learning environments) and students and their peers (Odeyemi 2012, 73; O’Rourke 2009, 7; Unisa 2008, 2). ODL provides flexible learning opportunities through learning environments that are process oriented and designed to promote discovery versus memorisation or mere repetition of contents (Bates 2012b; Odeyemi 2012, 74). The nature of the ODL environment requires students to manage the diverse and often conflicting demands and responsibilities of work and family, along with their commitment to further education and learning.
58
teaching research methodologyDe Beer et al.
For the new Programme Quality Mix (PQM) degrees at honours level, the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) legislated that at least 30 of the 120 credits of the degree should relate to research in the form of conducting and reporting on research under supervision (Department of Education 2007). These credits do not include the preparatory research methodology teaching that is required to equip students with the knowledge, skills and understanding necessary to prepare an acceptable research proposal and to conduct research and report the results in an acceptable scientific/academic format. Among many other dilemmas faced in the development of an online ODL module for the teaching of research methodology, there is a tendency towards negativity among students about research-related modules. In fact, the majority of students only take these (unpopular) modules because they are compulsory (Schober et al. 2006, 73). Introducing innovative and alternative approaches to the teaching of these modules is therefore key in creating a positive teaching and learning environment for both lecturers and students.
Research into teaching and learning in ODL contexts is receiving a growing amount of attention and should lead to a better understanding of the demands and benefits of this approach towards academic offering (Schober et al. 2006, 73). The current article presents the specific approaches, methods and techniques used in the development of an online ODL module for Honours level study of Research Methodology, as well as academic results and some biographical information of students. Institutional ethics approval was obtained for ODL research on modules offered in the Department. For the questionnaire in which biographical and other data was gathered, only the data of students who had provided consent for their information to be used is presented.
ConteXtuAL FACtoRs IMPACtInG on tHe DeVeLoPMent oF An oDL MoDuLe In ReseARCH MetHoDoLoGy
online tuition in an oDL context Using online platforms, ODL institutions can enhance their reach and address the educational needs of their students around the world (Simpson 2002, 8). Online delivery has the potential to provide effective, dialogic, student-centred, personalised education for students around the globe, as opposed to the more traditional transmission model of education (Simpson 2002, 8). Online tuition provides access to additional resources, explanations and glossaries through various web links (the connectivist approach to teaching and learning). Since the younger generation of students has grown up with technology, they are likely to be intrigued by the use of technology in a teaching environment (Al-Khatib 2009, 1–2; Bates 2012a, 2012b;
59
teaching research methodology
Chaves 2009, 1; Kisling 2012, 536; Odeyemi 2012, 73; Tracey 2009). Such use of technology to link up with students is in line with the new approaches to teaching and learning, all of which focus on the active involvement of students in the learning process. ‘The aim is to reorient the learners to remain within and not outside learning and look at innovative ways to raise the interest of the learner through grounding learning in the context of the learner’ (Al-Khatib 2009, 2–3).
Although various authors propose that online tuition could meet the learning needs of students in ODL environments, it is essential to keep a balanced view. Online tuition has the potential to be associated with a pedagogy that reflects the transmission model – an approach that alienates students and does not generate the desired engagement (Al-Khatib 2009, 2). In this regard, Al-Khatib (2009, 4) proposes that instead of simply including information and communication technology (ICT)-supported activities in existing instructional pedagogy, ICT integration should entail new models that reflect the context of the learners and their experience of a practice-reflection duality in the learning process. These models should therefore engage the learners in a dialogic and enquiry-based process in their pursuit of learning.
unisa online learning environmentIn 2006, the University of South Africa (Unisa) introduced an online learning environment in the form of myUnisa and students eagerly embraced the online learning environment. This is evidenced in this research module’s 2012 myUnisa usage statistics. During the first and second semesters of this first year that the module was offered (when 676 and 841 students were, respectively, registered for this module), 130 894 and 106 981 student activities were recorded on myUnisa. The myUnisa tools utilised the most were announcements (course emails) on the part of the lecturers, and assignment submissions and file downloads (usually in the form of study material downloads) on the part of the students.
Diversity of the student populationAs an ODL institution, Unisa accommodates huge student numbers and the wide dispersion of students in terms of their location has led to increased use of technology to improve the interaction with and service delivery to students. Student numbers in 2011 were reported at 328 179 (Unisa 2012b, 3) with the majority (41.47%) registering in the College of Economic and Management Sciences (CEMS) (Unisa 2012b, 4), the college for which this module was initially developed. In terms of gender distribution, females make up the majority (61.4%) of Unisa students (Unisa 2012b, 10), while in terms of ‘race groups’ the majority of students are African (69.4%), followed by white (17.7%), Indian (7.5%) and coloured (5.4%) (Unisa 2012b, 11). The majority (56.8%) of the Unisa student population is in the 25- to 29-year-old age group, followed by 24 years and younger (25.8%), 40 to 49 years
De Beer et al.
60
teaching research methodology
old (14.1%) and 50 years and older (3.3%). Most students (88.7%) study part time (Unisa 2012b, 10), which means that they have multiple responsibilities at work and at home in addition to their study commitments. The above institutional information justifies to some extent the use of technology, online teaching and online learning offerings to deliver an optimal service to students as far as their learning experience and administrative support are concerned.
The diversity of the student population to which the research methodology module is presented needs to be acknowledged. This diversity is, however, not limited to the usual demographics, but extends to the level of exposure the students have had to research. Nguyen and Clark (2005, 3) stress the importance of this diversity in cases similar to this module, where students with advanced knowledge of research are welcomed, students with intermediate knowledge are accepted and those students who are underprepared with no prior knowledge or exposure to research are catered for. This wide range of experience makes it imperative to consider a balancing act between the level at which the module is pitched and the experience of the students (Nguyen and Clark 2005, 3). These factors were taken into account when the module was planned, developed and implemented.
The diversity of the group of students is clear from Table 1, which presents some biographical data for those students who completed the baseline survey in the second week of the two semesters concerned.
students’ attitudes towards research methodology coursesIt has been reported that the majority of students in the tertiary education environment experience elevated levels of psychological distress and disengagement (Howell 2009, 1–2; Ouweneel, Le Blanc and Schaufeli 2011, 142–143; Van Zyl 2012, 117). These affective responses are facilitated through a perceived feeling of incompetence when exposed to elements perceived not to be in the students’ current field of interest/study (Noddings 2003, 89; Wiggins 1993, 107). Furthermore, learning difficulties in research methodology classes often have a negative impact on students’ attitude towards and interest in research, as well as on their academic performance (Wheeler and Elliott 2008, 133). Similarly, students enrolled for study in the economic and management sciences do not readily assume that aspects of research and statistics will be studied (Kreitner and Kinicki 2007, 207). As a result, they may report higher levels of anxiety, psychological stress and study disengagement if there is a large discrepancy between their expectation of the course and their actual experience (Howell 2009, 9; Ouweneel et al. 2011, 149–152).
De Beer et al.
61
teaching research methodology
Table 1: some biographical information of students who completed the baseline survey
De Beer et al.
Varia
ble
of
inte
rest
Cat
egor
yTo
tal
N =
55
0
Perc
enta
ge(%
)
Sem
este
r 1 N
= 3
44
Perc
enta
ge(%
)
Sem
este
r 2 N
= 2
06
Perc
enta
ge(%
)
Hig
hest
co
mpl
eted
qu
alifi
catio
n
Mis
sing
dat
a2
.4-
-2
1.0
3 ye
ar
B-de
gree
428
77.8
275
79.9
153
74.3
4 ye
ar
B-de
gree
101
18.4
5516
.046
22.3
Hon
ours
de
gree
173.
112
3.5
52.
4
Mas
ter’s
de
gree
2.4
2.6
--
Hom
e la
ngua
geAf
rikaa
ns96
17.5
7421
.522
10.7
engl
ish
197
35.8
130
37.8
6732
.5
isin
debe
le11
2.0
51.
56
2.9
isiX
hosa
346.
223
6.7
115.
3
isiZ
ulu
417.
524
7.0
178.
3
sepe
di42
7.6
195.
523
11.2
seso
tho
234.
212
3.5
115.
3
sets
wan
a39
7.1
195.
520
9.7
sisw
ati
91.
66
1.7
31.
5
tshi
vend
a5
.93
.92
1.0
Xits
onga
173.
19
2.6
83.
9
oth
er36
6.5
205.
816
7.8
62
teaching research methodology
The popularity of research courses compared with that of the main study focus areas is generally significantly lower (Schober et al. 2006, 73). Students therefore tend to show lower levels of motivation to actively participate in research method modules (Bauman 2004, 143; Wheeler and Elliott 2008, 134). Not only do students start out with lower levels of motivation for the research courses, but in many instances their interest also declines further over time (Schober et al. 2006, 73). According to Schober et al. (2006, 74), ‘methodology courses are not only unpopular, but are also
De Beer et al.
empl
oym
ent
stat
usu
nem
ploy
ed10
719
.572
.935
17.0
Wor
king
par
t tim
e50
9.1
288.
122
10.7
Wor
king
full
time
393
71.5
244
70.9
149
72.3
Inte
rnet
ac
cess
Mis
sing
dat
a1
.21
--
-
uni
sa c
entre
234.
215
4.4
83.
9
Inte
rnet
caf
é28
5.1
205.
88
3.9
Wor
k co
mpu
ter
207
37.6
131
38.1
7636
.9
ow
n co
mpu
ter
291
52.9
177
51.5
114
55.3
*Refl
ectin
g th
e re
sults
onl
y of
stu
dent
s w
ho h
ad c
ompl
eted
the
ques
tionn
aire
and
pro
vide
d co
nsen
t for
use
of
thei
r dat
a
63
teaching research methodology
associated with the highest levels of anxiety among students’. Students often register for research methodology courses because they are compulsory, and not because they voluntarily choose to take these courses. This reluctance is usually associated with the negative attitudes that students have towards research and other research-related courses such as statistics and mathematics (Coetzee and Van der Merwe 2010, 1; Papanastasiou 2005, 1; Terre Blanche, Durrheim and Painter 2006, vii).
Lower levels of motivation in a specific module affect not only dedication to the content, but also productivity, study engagement and academic performance (Bauman 2004, 143–144; Epstein 1987, 78). Low motivation also instills higher levels of resistance to research in the given fields (Epstein 1987, 78–79; Wheeler and Elliott 2008, 134–135). A negative attitude towards methodology courses is often associated with postponed enrolment, poor performance and avoidance of application of the subject content after completion (Schober et al. 2006, 74). What is more, the value of research in students’ current/future occupations is diminished by these negative perceptions (Holley et al. 2007, 101). Specific strategies and interventions must be introduced and implemented to address these negative outcomes.
Because students are generally less than positive about taking (often compulsory) research methodology modules (Ekmekci, Hancock and Swayze 2012, 272; Schober et al. 2006, 73), the staff involved in the development of an online ODL module for research methodology was particularly concerned about providing a worthwhile learning experience to students. The aim was to help them to remain engaged with their academic learning for this module and not to feel overwhelmed by the demands of a module often associated with higher levels of anxiety among students. Various techniques and methods were incorporated in the development and online presentation of the module concerned and are reported on in this article.
the importance of collaboration and team work in the development of online oDL coursesProperly designed learning environments are a vital element in an ODL system such as Unisa’s. Lecturers engage with students via the learning environments and (if properly designed) these learning environments promote self-directed learning on the part of students. During the planning stage, serious consideration was given to recognising the importance of the interrelated components of online learning, namely technology, course content, people and the learning tasks (Chen 2007, 75). Technology is explained as the mode that drives the online aspect of the module, while course content is based on the requirements for a module in Research Methodology at honours level. The people component includes all the key role players (such as the administrator, students, lecturers, course developers, lecturers as course managers and external markers), while the learning tasks entail the learning outcomes or goals of the module (Allach, Essaaidi and Ahmed 2011, 107; Chen 2007, 75). All these
De Beer et al.
64
teaching research methodology
components were considered when developing and implementing the compulsory Research Methodology module that was introduced for the honours degree in 2012.
A team approach was adopted to ensure that all elements were covered towards enhancing the success of the implementation process (Unisa 2010, 2). Njenga and Fourie (2010, 209–210) recommend that since most lecturers are constrained for time when designing online learning programmes, all possible stakeholders should be engaged in the development process. From 2011 onwards, Unisa mandated the use of a team approach in the design, development and facilitation of learning experiences. At different stages in this process, a team comprising the lecturers and other support departments (such as ICT), Library Services, curriculum and learning design division and layout artists) work together (Nikolaou and Koutsouba 2012, 1; Odeyemi 2012, 73; Unisa 2010, 2). Since the Research Methodology module was one of the first fully online modules with such high student numbers, the learning content that lecturers wanted to include in the module had to be carefully weighed against practical system constraints on ICT’s side, copyright restrictions on the part of the Library Services, and solid assessment principles as prescribed by the curriculum and learning design division.
All of the above were crucial factors to be taken into account in the attempt to understand and accommodate specific requirements within the context in which the online module would be developed and implemented.
oPtIMIsInG LeARnInG: tHe MoDuLe DesIGn AnD PResentAtIon
Adopting a structured approachWith due consideration to the above challenges, a structured framework was adopted in which the module was broken down into manageable weekly topics. This was deliberately done to ensure that students would not be overwhelmed by the volume of work contained in the module. As suggested by Nguyen and Clark (2005, 2), it is essential to optimise learning by managing, minimising and maximising the intrinsic, extraneous and germane cognitive loads, respectively. For this research module, the intrinsic load would be the weekly topic guide sections (used to introduce the content for the week and provide referrals to the prescribed book), while the extraneous load would be the resources provided for each of the weeks. The topics were compiled per week for ease of access and the germane load included additional resources such as the templates, research proposal examples and datasets that were added to enhance learning. The extraneous load was revised and trimmed down for the second semester by deleting all the repeated resources and using a single reference to each resource, linking to the week in which it was first provided.
De Beer et al.
65
teaching research methodology
The total content of the module was divided into smaller steps covering the 15-week study period allowed in a semester. This was presented in a tabulated format dealing with the week number, dates, theme for each week, the relevant chapter in the prescribed book, the self-assessment or output for each week, and additional or optional resources. An extract from the table supplied to the students is provided in Figure 1 below. The additional optional tasks were prepared specifically for the advanced students who may have been exposed to research prior to this module and who would feel less challenged if treated similarly as students with no prior knowledge of research. The inclusion of these tasks therefore addresses the specific need to challenge the advanced students.
Figure 1: extract from tabulated content of the module presented to students
In addition to the structured tabulated framework, an illustration of the so-called ‘research walk’ was presented to allow students to depict the steps to be taken in the 15-week journey of learning. Further information clearly stated the time demands of the module, the learning tasks, the responsibilities of the lecturers and the expectations and duties of students. According to Hess, Falkofske and Young (2009, 4), providing clear and detailed information on what is ahead in a learning sphere enables students to approach their learning experience with realistic expectations and less anxiety.
The constructivist learning approach adopted in the module provided for continuous assessment and activities for students to promote meaningful learning
De Beer et al.
66
teaching research methodology
during each week. It also afforded students the opportunity to reflect on experiences for personal growth (Chen 2007, 74; Duron, Limbach and Waugh 2006, 160). All these activities demanded the investment of a lot of time and effort by key role players to ensure the success of the module.
self-assessment activities to enhance student study engagementSince the module was developed in such a way that it encourages students to engage with the learning content on a weekly basis, a brief online questionnaire for self-evaluation was compiled to test student knowledge of the content covered in the particular week. This is in line with the practice of constantly quizzing or evaluating students, which Marcell (2008, 1) highlights as being essential to increase participation and performance online. It was also decided to include a baseline measurement for students to complete in the first week of commencing the research methodology module. The baseline measurement served several purposes. One of the primary purposes was to increase early and ongoing student engagement in the module. As the first self-evaluation to be completed for the module, its aim was to help students to familiarise themselves with the use of the self-evaluation tool on myUnisa and getting into the routine of completing self-evaluations on a weekly basis.
Previous research suggests that a practical approach in modules or authentic learning tasks embedded in the course content will enable students to see the value of the knowledge and skills that they are acquiring and will increase their understanding of the theory (Schulze 2009, 995). Hence another purpose of the baseline questionnaire was to practically illustrate some of the principles and content that students were learning about in the module. During the completion of the baseline measurement, students were taught one of the basic ethical principles when conducting research, namely informed consent. Students were asked to give their informed consent when completing the baseline measurement, but were first taught the meaning of informed consent and the reason for its importance when conducting research. Another element that was illustrated for students in completing the baseline measurement was the difference between quantitative and qualitative questions, because examples of each are included in the measurement (Baran and Jones 2012, 515–516).
Feedback on the baseline questionnaire was presented to students within two weeks of their submission of the baseline questionnaire data. The reasoning was that once students had completed the online baseline questionnaire themselves, they would find it interesting to see the questions’ results for the student group registered for this module. Both quantitative and qualitative data obtained from students who had submitted the questionnaire (and provided consent for their data to be used)
De Beer et al.
67
teaching research methodology
were reported to all registered students. The aim was to provide them with a basic understanding of these two broad approaches that form part of the learning material of the module (Baran and Jones 2012, 515). It was deemed imperative to engage students in this way early in the semester, so that they could develop a basic understanding of working with data from both a quantitative and a qualitative perspective. Having answered the relevant questions themselves, it was hoped that by presenting the student group information, some of the analysis methods used would not seem so overwhelming or strange to the majority of students. This strategy was intended to teach them what is involved in a typical research process and to motivate them to equip themselves with the necessary skills to independently conduct similar (survey and other research) activities.
Feedback on the two formative assignments and other self-assessment exercises was managed in a similar fashion. Feedback on the results of the student group was provided within two weeks of the submission of the assignments and incorporated feedback on the self-assessment exercises completed up to the formative submission dates. In the feedback, both quantitative and qualitative data was presented – once again to provide students with first-hand examples of the different approaches, the type of analysis done and what kind of results could be reported (Baran and Jones 2012, 515–516).
Since this is a new module, the baseline measurement is also used to gain a better understanding of the group of students enrolled for the module. According to O’Rourke (2009, 11), one should make a conscious effort to identify the needs and other factors that influence students’ learning experience so as to successfully meet their learning need. In ODL research, one cannot assume that there are large numbers of similar students. Furthermore, in an ODL institution, the distance does not only imply a physical distance, but also a psychological distance from the institution (O’Rourke 2009, 7). Students are often rooted in their own reality, and this may be totally different from the institution’s perception of the students. Hence, besides gathering biographical and background information from the students, the baseline measurement also encourages students to share their current thoughts and feelings on research. As mentioned earlier, it is assumed that postgraduate students, like undergraduate students, would typically tend to have negative attitudes and feelings towards research-related courses (Papanastasiou 2005, 16; Schulze 2009, 993). Since such attitudes could be obstacles to student learning or even influence performance in a course (Papanastasiou 2005, 16; Schulze 2009, 992), it seems imperative to gain some knowledge of students’ attitudes towards research at the very outset, when they enrol for this module. Students are asked to rate their attitude towards research in terms of the degree to which they experience anxiety about research, the degree to which they regard it as valuable or useful for their career, and the degree to which they harbour positive feelings about the subject of research. Preliminary inspection of the qualitative data that was gathered from the first group of students enrolled for
De Beer et al.
68
teaching research methodology
this module confirmed previous research on students’ anxiety towards research. The following are a few examples of students’ verbatim responses:
Taking this module has made me extremely anxious and unsure of myself. The last time i ever had to do any research was during high school for assignments and projects. Although i enjoyed the reseach process and putting the project together, i feel that in this stage of my life, career and studies, i will struggle with this module. I’ve always embraced challenges and i will try to see passing the module as another challenge that i will enjoy overcoming. All I expect for the semester ahead is lots of support from my lecturers. i already suspect that i will have no problem in that regard, so i’m excited, though anxious, about progressing with this module … [sic].
I feel scared and very anxious about research methodology. I have always avoided coursed that had to do with research. I think I have an ideal about what the course entails but I am not sure, I think also that reseach methodology might be interesting. My expectations are to find out what the course entails and how to do research, how to collect dat, analyse and draw conclusions. I also want to find out how to approach the collection of data, and get over my anxiety ... [sic].
However, besides expressing some fear and foreboding, a number of students also expressed excitement about the module:
I am very excited to be enrolled in the Research Methods module for 2012. For me, research stimulates my mind and helps me to think out of the box ... [sic].
I am looking forward to what this module offers in terms of knowledge and skills. I am slightly nervous about my ability to perform research but my confidence will hopefully increase throughout the year. I expect this module to be challenging with a large amount of practical application … [sic].
An additional purpose of the baseline questionnaire was to use the data to evaluate the effectiveness of the module. Arthur, Tubre, Paul and Edens (2003, 277) argue that using the final course grade to evaluate what students learnt in the course may be inappropriate. There seems to be several reasons for this viewpoint, for instance that the final course grade may be influenced by factors such as bias in the examination process. Since the final mark only serves as a measurement after completion of the module (post-test only), it is recommended that an objective pre-/post measurement of student learning should also be incorporated.
Davis and Sandifer-Stech (2006, 59) propose that besides addressing knowledge and skills, research methodology education should also attempt to improve students’ levels of confidence in their research abilities (research self-efficacy) and ameliorate certain problems such as their experience of anxiety about statistics. In line with these suggestions, Davis and Sandifer-Stech (2006, 61) developed learning criteria to measure their students’ success in an undergraduate curriculum teaching
De Beer et al.
69
teaching research methodology
research methodology. Their measure included a section collecting biographical and background information from the students. It also included an assessment of students’ self-reported confidence in their own research skills and abilities, as well as a measure to assess their actual knowledge and skills. The baseline questionnaire followed the same approach and measured students’ attitude towards research, their research self-efficacy and their current knowledge of research methodology that would typically be covered in the module. The data reflecting students’ position before and after completion of the module was used by Davis and Sandifer-Stech (2006) to investigate the effect of the module in improving not only students’ knowledge, but also their confidence in their own abilities. Such results are not the focus of this article.
elements included to provide affective support to studentsOne way in which to manage negative affective responses is through encouragement and support (Howell 2009, 8; Noddings 2003, 91). In the Unisa online module, the aim was to address the potentially higher levels of negative affect experienced by participants towards research methodology through weekly introductory messages and by relating the ‘new’ content to existing knowledge. Podcast messages were used to encourage students close to the due dates of assessment tasks.
The weekly introductory messages were used to familiarise students with the content of the specific week and also to encourage them along their learning journey. The messages were encouraging and supportive and aimed at addressing not only the weekly theme, but also administrative matters. According to Noddings (2003, 77), instructions presented in an encouraging and supportive manner help to alleviate anxiety, which results in increased study engagement (Howell 2009).
The Unisa lecturers also endeavoured to address students’ potential levels of anxiety by linking the module’s structure with the tough but popular Comrades Marathon held annually in South Africa. Noddings (2003, 188–189) argues that students are more inclined to understand new information if it is related to previous knowledge and experience. Research also suggests that metaphors, symbols and narratives are effective to provide context for the internalisation of new information (Noddings 2003, 47; Seligman 2011, 99). The Comrades Marathon analogy helps to familiarise students with the process of the module and provides a familiar yardstick for determining progress. An example of a weekly introductory message is provided in Figure 2 below.
De Beer et al.
70
teaching research methodology
Figure 2: example from a home page message
elements included to provide peer-related learning and supportLearning synergies can best be achieved in most distance education programmes when the creation of a virtual learning community is at the heart of the e-learning curricula (Chaves 2009, 1). A sense of community can be established through student-student, student-instructor and student-content interactions (Aiken 2012, 511; Unisa 2011, 1).
Chaves (2009, 2–3) highlights various theories that one can consider in relation to student interaction and involvement, including Tinto’s interaction model, Astin’s involvement theory, Kolb’s experiential learning construct, McCarthy’s 4MAT curriculum model, Chickering and Gamson’s Seven Principles of Good Practice for Undergraduate Education (SPGPUE) (which serves to combine most of the preceding theoretical constructs into one) and Chaves’s Online Curriculum Interaction Model. According to Chaves’s model, the most intimate level of engagement is achieved through the inclusion of information technology tools such as real-time (synchronous) voice, text chat, camera images and full-motion videos (Chaves 2009). At Unisa, interactivity is understood as providing a learning environment in which students can interact with their lecturers and peers and the module content is supported by
De Beer et al.
71
teaching research methodology
myUnisa (Chaves 2009, 4; Drouin 2008, 269; Nikolaou and Koutsouba 2012, 1; Unisa 2011, 1).
Discussion forums can also be used to promote active peer collaborative learning. In-graded student projects, threaded discussions and synchronous chat sessions should be designed to foster students’ motivation for active learning and to encourage them to work together towards creating learning resources and receiving peer feedback (Al-Khatib 2009, 4; Chaves 2009, 4).
In this module, online discussion forums provided students with a platform to engage with peers and created opportunities for exchanging social support (Noddings 2003, 67). The discussion forums acted as a medium through which students could engage with the content of the module and discuss areas of concern with peers. The lecturers acted as moderators for these forums and interjected where necessary. Students actively engaged in these online forums and assisted one another in mastering the content.
using technology in assessment and feedback to studentsAssessing and marking students’ work is an essential part of the Unisa ODL tuition model. Formal assessment can be a time-consuming activity, especially due to the large numbers of students enrolled at Unisa (Unisa 2012a). Nonetheless, assessing student work and providing meaningful feedback and comments make an invaluable contribution to students’ learning. Unfortunately, meaningful assessment is often neglected because of the burden of administrative tasks such as adding marks, completing class lists and distributing marked assignments to external markers and others (Unisa 2012a).
A centralised router system and onscreen marking tools are two of the methods used in this module so as to manage the marking of assignments/tests and to provide feedback to students in an effective and efficient manner.
The router system provides a centralised management system of students’ submitted assignments for the online module in the ODL environment. The router promotes timely feedback on assignments and portfolios since it enables the system administrator to receive both unmarked and marked assignments/portfolios in a central electronic location. From there, unmarked assignments and portfolios can be posted to markers and marked assignments can be returned to students. This procedure is far more streamlined than paper-based assessment, where feedback takes much longer to reach students, because results/grades must first return to the Assignment Department before they can be mailed to the students via the post office (Kumar, Perraton and Machotka 2010, 4). A further benefit is that electronic copies of marked assignments and portfolios can be saved for backup purposes.
The router works hand in hand with onscreen marking software. Copies of assignments and portfolios are distributed electronically and marked on screen by
De Beer et al.
72
teaching research methodology
lecturers and external markers (University of Cambridge 2002, 2). Assignments are submitted by students in a Portable Document Format (PDF) file and made available to the course team through the router. Students submit their assignments via the myUnisa platform, from where these electronic files are routed by module code to the relevant lecturers and external markers. With the router, all assignments and portfolios received in an electronic format can easily be distributed to lecturers and markers. Since this is a new module and some students are not yet used to online modules, a small number of them still sent hard-copy assignments that had to be scanned in to enable use of the onscreen marking program. The aim is to work towards 100 per cent online submission with no paper-based assignments.
Marked assignments are returned by the markers via the router and selective moderation is done on an ad hoc basis (by the module lecturers) before the assignments are posted back to students’ myUnisa email accounts via the router. Students can send their enquiries to the module email address (Kumar et al. 2010, 4) from where such enquiries are managed by the module team.
Facilitating communication between lecturers and studentsRegardless of the number of students registered for the module, regular and clear communication is undoubtedly the key to a successful teaching and learning experience with an online module in an ODL environment for both learners and instructors (Faculty Focus 2012, 8 ; Kumar et al. 2010, 4).
Communication via the course email address constitutes one of the principal tools of interaction with students for this module. It is linked to the myUnisa site for the module, to which all students have access through login details provided by the university when they register for the module. The use of the course email helps to create a fully online communication environment as opposed to the more traditional approach of communication by means of printed tutorial letters, the telephone and office visits by students. The support team (lecturers and administrative staff) communicate with students on a daily basis by responding to emails sent to the course email address. A 24-hour response time has been set as a quality benchmark for responding to students’ enquiries or requests submitted via the course contact email. Since student enquiries range from administrative to academic, it was deemed essential to evaluate the kind of enquiries that come through the course email. A large proportion was found to be administrative rather than academic, mostly because students do not read carefully through the available information and instructions or announcements posted on the course site.
De Beer et al.
73
teaching research methodology
InItIAL ACADeMIC ResuLts AnD FeeDBACK FRoM stuDentsThe academic results of the first two student groups registered for this module are reported in Table 2. The mean scores indicate that, on average, students achieved a pass mark.
Table 2: Descriptive results of academic performance of students for the first two semesters
Semester Assessment N Minimum Maximum Mean SD
1 Assignment 01 (written) 627 5.00 89.00 58.21 14.70
Assignment 02 (MCQ) 627 0.00 88.00 58.24 15.82
Portfolio (combination) 556 9.00 94.00 59.28 18.83
Final mark 556 8.00 93.00 59.88 16.58
2 Assignment 01 (written) 667 2.00 92.00 53.97 16.25
Assignment 02 (MCQ) 666 1.00 89.50 55.58 17.73
Portfolio (combination) 521 1.00 95.00 49.87 21.34
Final mark 521 4.00 92.00 52.29 18.59
*excluding students who had plagiarised in the written Assignment or the Portfolio
In terms of the distribution of the final results, it is clear that although some students failed the module, the majority of students achieved a pass mark. For the two semesters, the percentages of students who submitted the final portfolio and achieved a final pass mark in this module were 78.62 per cent (first semester) and 64.04 per cent (second semester). A comparison of the average results between the Honours semester modules in the College of Economic and Management Sciences (75.18% for semester 1 and 74.49% for semester 2) and in the University (60.23% for semester 1 and 61.06% for semester 2) shows that the online module has indeed rendered positive results (2013, Personal communication with the Department of Institutional Statistics and Analysis (DISA)).
De Beer et al.
74
teaching research methodology
Figure 3: Distribution of final academic results for Semester 1
As indicated in some of the reflective qualitative feedback from students reported below, limited time and a high volume of work that needed to be covered every week could have contributed to some students not achieving a pass mark in this module.
According to Duron et al. (2006, 163), one of the primary aspects of active learning is affording students the opportunity to reflect on their learning experiences. Phan (2009, 943) asserts that reflecting develops a curiosity to question and explore, which are essential characteristics of a researcher. In this module, reflective tasks were set on a weekly basis. Students were encouraged to respond to two qualitative questions on how they had experienced the learning of that week. The following are examples of the verbatim comments and feedback from students:
De Beer et al.
75
teaching research methodology
Figure 4: Distribution of final academic results for Semester 2
The outlay of the subject – giving an overview is very helpful in understanding the concept. It is still a long way to go and a lot of work. I see this as building a puzzle, the outer border is completed, now we are starting inner, nitty gritty, of the puzzle... [sic].
Some of the content discussed in this section I did last year in Marketing but this is done in a lot more depth ... [sic].
I’m not coping as well as I would like to. I don’t think the work is unmanageable, it’s my time management skills that need refining. I’m currently two weeks behind, but I’ve cut out my social life until I finish this module. This should help. [sic]
It’s almost a culture now that I have to study two hours per day to try to reach the weekly target … [sic]
De Beer et al.
76
teaching research methodology
Thus far I have found it a bit more challenging each week to stay on the bus in terms of the workload, there is a substantial amount of reading to do and I am apprehensive about applying my knowledge of what I have learnt in this course when it comes to the assignments. When I read the material it seems relatively easy but when it gets to the practical application I find myself struggling. This has lead to me falling off the bus on quite a few occasions, however as a result of the time constraints on this module I have managed to get back onto the bus ... [sic].
The above examples are a snippet of the information shared by students over the duration of the module. They seemed to be concerned about time availability and management, while recognising a need to cope so as not to be left behind in the proposed learning schedule. The students nonetheless took responsibility for finding ways to cope, and their feedback can be used to revise and improve aspects of the presentation or content of the module. These reflections often require students to take time to think through their learning experiences. As mentioned by Phan (2009, 942), self-reflection is an in-depth analysis exercise that cannot be taken lightly if it is to be done properly.
Lessons LeARnt AnD tHe WAy FoRWARDThe following are some lessons learnt from the practices highlighted in this article:
● Providing a proper learning environment and learning experiences by means of design, planning and development should be at the core of online teaching (Bates 2012b; Nikolaou and Koutsouba 2012, 7; Unisa 2010, 2). Teaching needs to be redesigned to fit the needs of online students – in essence, one needs to rethink the way one teaches (Aiken 2012, 511; Bates 2012a). This approach is promoted through the use of design teams that provide effective technical support and the use of an LMS such as myUnisa (Bates 2012a; Unisa 2010, 2).
● Besides using their desktop and laptop computers, students can interact with the myUnisa site via their cell phones by uploading multiple-choice assignments, receiving feedback on their assignments and downloading course material. Unisa is exploring the use of mobile technology in more aspects of its online tuition, seeing that ‘South Africa has the third largest mobile Internet-using population in the world’ (Czerniewicz 2009, 14). According to Lanerolle (2012, 6), ‘internet use has more than doubled in the last four years’ and a third of adults use the internet – the majority (71%) by means of mobile phones. Kreutzer’s research (cited in Czerniewicz 2009, 15) on the low-income youth in South Africa indicated that about 83 per cent of this group have access to the internet via cell phones. Internationally, mobile access accounts for 10.01 per cent of internet usage and has increased from 3.81 per cent in 2010 (Russel 2012). Course design teams should take cognisance of these trends and incorporate
De Beer et al.
77
teaching research methodology
mobile applications in their e-course designs. Use of mobile technology can improve accessibility as well as student-to-student and student-to-lecturer communication, in particular if social networks are also utilised (Mayisela 2013, 1).
● The use of additional multimedia and information technology tools such as real-time (synchronous) voice (podcasts), text chat, camera images and full-motion videos should be enhanced. Use of sound and video helps students to move between the concrete and abstract (Bates 2012a). This will promote higher levels of engagement, especially in courses that have large student numbers, causing students to feel more isolated.
● One of the main challenges in terms of the present module is the teaching of writing skills to students in an ODL online environment. Developing and expressing ideas in written form is an essential element towards graduateness or the success of students in their academic and professional development (Castello, Banales and Vega 2010, 1255; Zimmerman 1997, 73). Proper referencing and avoidance of plagiarism should also be emphasised – along with logical and coherent construction of written content. According to Nelson, Range and Ross (2012, 378) checklists can be particularly useful for helping students to overcome the more mechanical writing problems.
● Lastly, managing the ethical component of research and academic writing is a particularly important facet of research teaching and learning at Honours level.
The development of an online module for teaching Research Methodology has been an exciting though arduous journey. It has required all stakeholders in the broader team to remain closely involved through the development, implementation and ongoing management of the module. On the positive side, it has been an utterly rewarding experience. The excitement of using new approaches/technologies and experiencing the connectedness with students that these approaches offer has balanced the effort and time involved in launching this new module. The constant learning along the way has been enriching and the generally positive feedback received from students encouraging. As a first step, this has inspired all those involved and has acted as a springboard towards a culture of teamwork and collaboration among academic staff, support staff and other stakeholders and contributors to the process.
ReFeRenCes Aiken, I. P. 2012. American Institute of Higher Education 7th International Conference March
7–9, 2012: Effective teaching in online environments. Williamsburg, VA: American Institute of Higher Education.
Al-Khatib, H. 2009. How has pedagogy changed in a digital age? ICT-supported learning: Dialogic forums in project work. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning 2: 1–5.
De Beer et al.
78
teaching research methodology
Allach, S., M. Essaaidi and B. Ahmed. 2011. Towards optimizing learning paths in a system E-learning adaptive: Application of an algorithm (ACO). International Journal of Computer Engineering Science 1(3): 105–115. http://wwwijces.com (accessed 7 May 2012).
Arthur, W., T. Tubre, D. S. Paul and P. S. Edens. 2003. Teaching effectiveness: The relationship between reaction and learning evaluation criteria. Educational Psychology 23(3): 275–285.
Baran, M. and J. E. Jones. 2012. American Institute of Higher Education 7th International Conference March 7–9, 2012: The importance of teaching graduate students both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Williamsburg, VA: American Institute of Higher Education.
Bates, T. 2012a. Online learning and distance education resources. http://www.tonybates.ca/2012/04/24/designing-online-learning-for-the-21st-century/ (accessed 16 May 2012).
Bates, T. 2012b. Online learning and distance education resources. http://www.tonybates.ca /2012/05/06/nine-steps-to-quality-online-learning-step-1-decide-how-you-want-to-teach-online/ (accessed 16 May 2012).
Bauman, S. 2004. School counselor and research revisited. Professional School Counseling 7: 141–151.
Castello, M., G. Banales and N. A. Vega. 2010. Research approaches to the regulation of academic writing: The state of the question. Electronic Journal of Research in Education 8(3): 1253–1282.
Chaves, C. A. 2009. On-line course curricula and interactional strategies: The foundations and extensions to adult e-learning communities. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning 1: 1–6.
Chen, S. 2007. Instructional design strategies for intensive online courses: An objectivist-constructivist blended approach. Journal of Interactive Online Learning 6(1): 72–86. www.ncolr.org/jiol (accessed 16 May 2012).
Coetzee, S. and P. van der Merwe. 2010. Industrial psychology students’ attitudes towards statistics. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology 36(1): Art 843, 8 pages. DOI:10.4102/sajip.v36i1.843
Czerniewicz, L. 2009. Cell phones and Sakai: Increasing access for all? Presentation at SAKAI Conference, Boston, Massachusetts, 8–10 July.
Davis, J. C. and D. M. Sandifer-Stech. 2006. Wade into the water: Preparing students for successful quantitative research. Family Relations 55: 56–66.
Department of Education. 2007. The Higher Education Qualifications Framework: Higher Education Act 101 of 1997. (South Africa). Government Gazette, notice no. 30353, pp 3–29.
Drouin, M. A. 2008. The relationship between students’ perceived sense of community and satisfaction, achievement, and retention in an online course. Quarterly Review of Distance Education 9(3): 267–284.
Duron, R., B. Limbach and W. Waugh. 2006. Critical thinking framework for any discipline. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 17(2): 160–166. http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/ (accessed 7 May 2012).
Ekmekci, O., A. B. Hancock and S. Swayze. 2012. Teaching statistical research methods to graduate students: Lessons learned from three different degree programs. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 24(2): 272–279.
De Beer et al.
79
teaching research methodology
Epstein, I. 1987. Pedagogy of the perturbed: Teaching research to the reluctant. Journal of Teaching in Social Work 1(1): 71–89.
Faculty Focus. 2012. 10 principles of effective online teaching: Best practices in distance education. http://www.eou.edu/~bb/workshops/10%20Principles%20of%20Effective%20Online%20Teaching.pdf (accessed 14 May 2012).
Hess, K., J. Falkofske and C. B. Young. 2009. 11 strategies for managing your online courses: Syllabus template development for online course success. Online Cl@ssroom: Faculty Focus Special Report. www.FacultyFocus.com (accessed 16 May 2012).
Holley, L. C., C. Risley-Curtiss, T. Stott, D. R. Jackson and R. Nelson. 2007. ‘It’s not scary’ empowering women students to become researchers. Journal of Women and Social Work 22: 99–115.
Howell, A. J. 2009. Flourishing: Achievement-related correlates of students’ well-being. Journal of Positive Psychology 4(1): 1–13.
Jansen, J. 2012. And the loser is? Education in SA. Pretoria News, 7 January, Comment: 7.Kisling, E. 2012. Web X.0: The future of problem solving in online education. American Institute
of Higher Education 7th International Conference March 7–9, 2012. Williamsburg, VA: American Institute of Higher Education.
Kreitner, R. and A. Kinicki. 2007. Organizational behaviour 7th ed. . New York: McGraw-Hill.Kumar, S., L. Perraton and Z. Machotka. 2010. Development and implementation of an online
hybrid model for teaching evidence-based practice to health professions: Processes and outcomes from an Australian experience. Journal of Advances in Medical Education and Practice 1: 1–9. http://www.dovepress.com/development-and-implementation-of-an-online-hybrid-model-for-teaching-peer-reviewed-article-AMEP (accessed 20 May 2012).
Lanerolle, I. 2012. The New Wave Report. http://www. networksociety.co.za (accessed 19 August 2013).
Marcell, M. 2008. Effectiveness of regular online quizzing in increasing class participation and preparation. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 2(1): 1–9.
Mayisela, T. 2013. The potential use of mobile technology: Enhancing accessibility and communication in a blended learning course. South African Journal of Education 33(1): 1–18.
myUnisa. 2010. Status of myUnisa deployment. Unisa report, September.Nelson, J. S., L. M. Range and M. B. Ross. 2012. A checklist to guide graduate students’ writing.
International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 24(3): 376–382.Nguyen, F. and R. C. Clark. 2005. Efficiency in e-Learning: Proven instructional methods for
faster, better, online learning. Learning Solutions e-Magazine 1–7: November 7. www.eLearningGuild.com (accessed 16 May 2012).
Nikolaou, A. and M. Koutsouba. 2012. Incorporating 4MAT Model in distance instructional material – an innovative design. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning 1: 1–10.
Njenga, J. K. and L. C. H. Fourie. 2010. The myths about e-learning in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology 41(2): 199–212.
Noddings, N. 2003. Happiness and education. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
De Beer et al.
80
teaching research methodology
Odeyemi, O. J. 2012. Facilitation in open and distance learning: A catalyst for qualitative learning. International Journal of Social Science & Education 2(2): 73–81.
Ouweneel, E., P. M. Le Blanc and W. B. Schaufeli. 2011. Flourishing students: A longitudinal study on positive emotions, personal resources, and study engagement. Journal of Positive Psychology 6: 142–153.
O’Rourke, J. 2009. Meeting diverse learning needs. Progressio 31(1&2): 5–16.Papanastasiou, E. C. 2005. Factor structure of the ‘Attitudes to Research’ scale. Statistics
Education Research Journal 4(1): 16–26.Phan, H. P. 2009. Reflective thinking, effort, persistence, disorganization, and academic
performance: A mediational approach. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology 7(3): 927–952.
Russel, J. Thenextweb. 9 May 2012. http://thenextweb.com/mobile/2012/05/09/mobile-now-accounts-for-10-of-internet-usage-worldwide-double-that-of-2010-report/ (accessed 15 May 2012).
Schober, B., P. Wagner, R. Reimann, M. Atria and C. Spiel. 2006. Teaching research methods in an internet-based blended-learning setting. Methodology 2(2): 73–82.
Schulze, S. 2009. Teaching research methods in a distance education context: Concerns and challenges. South African Journal of Higher Education 23(5): 992–1008.
Seligman, M. E. P. 2011. Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. New York: Free Press.
Simpson, O. 2002. Supporting students in online, open and distance learning. London: Routledge-Falmer.
Statistics South Africa. 2012. Census 2011: Census in Brief. (Report No. 03-01-41 (2011)). Pretoria: Statistic South Africa.
Terre Blanche, M., M. K. Durrheim and D. Painter. 2006. Preface. In Research in practice: Applied methods for the social sciences, ed. M. Terre Blanche, K. Durrheim, and D. Painter, vii. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.
Tracey, R. 2009. E-learning provocateur provoking deeper thinking. http://ryan2point0.wordpress.com/2009/03/17/instructivism-constructivism-or-connectivism/ (accessed 16 May 2012).
Unisa. 2008. Open distance learning policy. Pretoria: Unisa.Unisa. 2010. Framework for the implementation of a team approach to curriculum and learning
development at Unisa. Implementation procedures for the Unisa tuition policy and other policies related to tuition. Pretoria: Unisa.
Unisa. 2011. Unisa tutor model. Pretoria: Unisa.Unisa. 2012a. The Unisa tool for onscreen marking. http://www.unisa.ac.za/ Default.
asp?Cmd=ViewContent&ContentID=23049 (accessed 13 May 2012).Unisa. 2012b. An update on the institutional profile of Unisa: HEMIS 2007–2011. Department
of Institutional Statistics and Analysis, April 2012. http://heda.unisa.ac.za/filearchive/Briefing%20Report%20Unisa%20Facts%20&%20Figures%2020120508.pdf (accessed 18 May 2012.)
University of Cambridge. 2002. On screen marking of scanned paper scripts. A report published by the University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate. http://www.
De Beer et al.
81
teaching research methodology
cambridgeassessment.org.uk/ca/digitalAssets/113896_On_Screen_Marking.pdf (accessed 12 May 2012.)
Van Zyl, L. E. 2012. The development and evaluation of positive psychological interventions aimed at happiness. Unpublished doctoral thesis, North-West University, Vanderbijlpark, South Africa.
Wheeler, S. and R. Elliott. 2008. What do counselors and psychotherapists need to know about research? Counselling and Psychotherapy Research 8(2): 133–135.
Wiggins, G. 1993. Assessing student performance: Exploring the purpose and limits of testing. San Francisco, CA Jossey-Bass.
Zimmerman, B. J. 1997. Research for the future: Becoming a self-regulated writer: A social cognitive perspective. Contemporary Educational Psychology 22: 73–101. Article no. EP970919.
De Beer et al.
View publication statsView publication stats
