Computation of effective Young’s Modulus using soft computing

9.1.2.1 Question 1

Does this combinational PEAR approach result in a ‘better’ or more

‘successful’ integration of a medium into education?

This question is in relation to the integration process. We measured this in two ways. We asked the users to evaluate the usefulness of the result and the integration process itself in comparison with past experience.

96% of the teachers and 78% of the students, who used the system, rated the system 4 (of some use) or 5 (useful). Although this is very subjective and not easily comparable with past integration experiences, the result does nevertheless show that the service was considered useful by most of its user. This is important, as a successful integration process could not be considered a success if the service it is trying to introduce over that medium is not useful.

The teachers were also asked how the introduction of the EIS reminder service went in comparison to their past ICT introduction. 96% of them rated the introduction system as better (52%) or much better (44%). Although, the question of whether or not an ICT introduction process is considered better or a success is very subjective and is relative to past experiences, this is still an indication that the majority of the teachers were positive about how the service was introduced.

University

of Cape

Town

9.1 Research Questions We also evaluated the integration process with respect to the challenges experienced in ICT4D projects and/or past integration experiences. This can be summarised as follows:

Cost of Infrastructure and Personnel: Use of existing resources and personnel in the integration effort saved cost. Once the system was proven useful, more resources would be easier to source. Much of the expertise already existed at school in teachers and students. Teachers and students were involved in various aspects of the system such as the design of the interface and database development. We also found that the programming skills of the researcher were still required to either teach the students or to implement part of the system (database normalisation and PHP programming). However, the level of skill required does not exceed the qualification requirement of an Information Technology teacher and that this skill set should be present in a school offering the subject.

Users’ ICT Literacy level: Even though the teachers at the school did not possess basic computer literacy training, the design process incorporates what teachers are already able to do well. By doing this, the levels of training and subsequent support required were also reduced. Further support, which many teachers felt was not necessary, included student-based support. A trial run of the system without the data being published also boosted the teachers’ confidence and competency level before the actual launch of the system.

Purpose of the project to the user: Our project consisted of not only extensive consultation but also participation of users – teachers and students. 88% of the teachers felt more involved with the development of the system than expected, while 41.3% of the students felt the same way. This could be because almost all of the teachers (except for those who joined after the different iterations) were involved in the project while only 23% of the students were. Students were also only able to take part in a much shorter span of time.

Timing of users’ involvement: There is reduced amount of training to be done since teachers are already familiar with the system that they have helped to design.

Additionally, they were also able to make one-to-one appointments for training at a time suitable for them. The phased-in approach also helped teachers to get used to

University

of Cape

Town

9.1 Research Questions User friendliness of the system: Most of the teachers and the majority of the students found the system easy to use. This was attributed to the phase-in introduction of system. The fact that the users participated in the design meant that the teachers were already familiar with the system and that it was designed for the specific context it was deployed in.

The majority of the users found the resultant system useful while almost all teachers found the integration process to be better than their past experiences. Comparison with past integration challenges also showed us that our combination approach produced a system that addressed all of the challenges to those integration efforts.

This integration process can then be said to be more successful than those experienced by teachers in the past as well as in comparison to those outlined in the Chapter 3.

9.1.2.2 Question 2

Which part of the combinational PEAR approach worked and can this approach be refined for use as a better or more successful way to integrate new technology into education?

The second research question involves the combination process itself. To answer this question, we evaluated each of the contributing factors for successful ICT4D projects as well as the corresponding link to EAR (originally presented in Chapter 4) as identified by the Process approach to assess the influence each had on the results and the integration process itself - positively or negatively. Here is a brief summary of the evaluation of each factor.

Beneficiary Participation: We made use of existing resources and personnel in every aspect of integration process. By doing this, we built a sense of ownership and involvement in the project with almost every teacher and a sizeable portion of the students. Furthermore, feedback from the users was used to implement visible changes to the specification. This also added to the sense of ownership. Where it was not possible to involve other personnel from within, the researcher provided some expertise in order to move the project on. However, the researcher is part of the community, it has been argued throughout whereever this is the case that the skill the researcher is providing is within the expected knowledge of an Information

University

of Cape

Town

9.1 Research Questions Technology teacher. Use of existing material resources also helped to minimise cost.

This was reflected in the ingenuity of the local community as they identified existing resources and took steps to make use of them. Without the involvement of the community, these resources may not have been identified.

Flexible, phased implementation: We started with a broad intention of integrating the mobile medium and the community honed in on a common aspects over multiple iterations. The periodical nature of the school schedule (based on four 9-10-weeks terms) helped to ensure that each phase was not overly long. Focusing on one iteration at a time also helped to make sure that only resources that are necessary and proven useful are acquired – thus minimising the financial requirement of the integration process and ensuring that more resources are not spent on designing and pushing thorough features that will not likely work or be useful. This is in comparison to past integration effort which has resulted in features that were not used after a large amount of effort had been spent on putting them in place.

Learning from experience: Lessons learnt from previous iterations were incorporated into the next and participants could see this happening. There was also a risk-taking element – participants were able to suggest a direction, even if it may have been contrary to the evidence at hand. In some cases, this worked out for the improvement of the overall system.

Institutional support: The existing Planning Team took on the role of planning. This group contained all the key decision makers (in terms of the day to day running of the school) and thus was the most suitable structure to plan. The committee also contained key staff who were well respected by both teachers and students.

Students’ participation was also encouraged through the mentor structures at the participating school.

Programme Management: There was high level of support from the top in the integration effort. This support was not financial but their willingness for the existing leadership and other existing structures to be used in the process. The principal and deputy principal sat on the Planning Team and were able to provide input. There was also a grade head presence on the committee. This afforded us the ability to reach out to both staff and students. There was a good hierarchical

University

of Cape

Town

9.1 Research Questions leadership structure with excellent communication channel down to individual teachers. The respect and trust placed in the leadership were also essential.

We also took a look back at the PEAR approach we used to integrate the mobile medium and make these recommendations on what should be done when applying the PEAR approach.

1. Start small and build up in phases based on what was discovered in each phase. That way, not everything has to be thrown away if it did not work and this is a chance to prove that the system will work.

2. Involve as many people from the school as possible. Find the relevant skill in teachers or students or teach the students the skill. Reach out to the wider school community such as parents. Involvement of users also helps later on to promote the adoption of the medium – so it is good to involve as many as possible.

3. Existing leadership structures at school will definitely help to provide the lead but create strong leadership within the group – allowing everyone the space to speak out.

4. Make the project a school project – get everyone involved.

5. Make sure the school management and those in leadership roles understand the purpose of the integration as well as the approach that is being taken.

6. Do not create deadlines for when task should be completed. Set up the timeframe so that there is enough time for the task to be accomplished but also have the flexibility to end earlier or finish later.

7. Tell teachers and students about the overall aim of the project, but there is no need to get down to the small and technical detail.

8. It may be the case that an IT-related skill does not exist within the school walls and needs to be acquired. Teach the students the skill if possible or

University

of Cape

Town

9.2 Research Contributions