Perceptions
The second research objective of the present study was to examine whether differences existed between what primary school aged students perceived that they actually experienced and what they would prefer, in terms of both their classroom learning environments and their use of ICT. To examine differences between the students’ actual and preferred responses, descriptive statistics (including the average item means and average item standard deviations) were calculated. To examine whether the
170
actual–preferred differences were statistically significant, MANOVA was used. The students’ actual and preferred responses were used as the dependent variables; the nine learning environment scales and two of the ICT Usage Survey scales (Investigating with ICT and Communicating with ICT)10 were used as the independent variables. Finally, to examine the magnitude of the differences for students’ responses to the actual and preferred versions of each survey, the effect sizes were calculated. This section reports the results of these analyses in terms of students’ perceptions of the learning environment (Section 5.2.1) and of their ICT usage (Section 5.2.2).
5.2.1 Actual and Preferred Differences in Students’ Perceptions of their Learning Environment
The results, reported in Table 5.1 and displayed graphically in Figure 5.1, indicated that the average item means were higher for students’ preferred responses than for the corresponding actual responses for all CCQ-P scales11 except Task Orientation. These results suggested that, with the exception of Task Orientation, students would prefer their learning environment to be more positive than they currently perceive the environment to be. As shown in Table 5.1, the average item standard deviations for the actual and preferred scores for all scales were less than 1, indicating a narrow spread across the student responses.
As described in Section 3.6.2, to determine whether there were statistically significant differences between students’ perceptions of their actual and preferred learning environments, a one-way MANOVA was used. Given that this multivariate test yielded significant results (p < .01) in terms of Wilks’s lambda criterion (Wilks, 1935; indicating that there were statistically significant differences in the set of criterion variables as a whole), the univariate ANOVA was interpreted for the individual CCQ- P scales. The ANOVA results (F values), reported in Table 5.1, indicated that there were statistically significant (p < .01) differences between the actual and preferred responses for all nine CCQ-P scales. For all but one scale, Task Orientation, the results suggested that students would prefer a more positive learning environment than they
10 The Investigating with ICT and Communicating with ICT scales were the only ICT Usage Survey
scales used as dependent variables as these were the only two of the five ICT Usage Survey scales which utilised an actual–preferred format.
171
currently perceive to be present; however, the results indicated that students would prefer a lower level of Task Orientation than that which their current learning environment reflects.
Table 5.1. Average item means, average item standard deviations, and differences between means (effect sizes and MANOVA results) for the actual and preferred responses to the CCQ-P
CCQ-P scale
Average item mean Average item standard deviation
Difference between means
Actual Preferred Actual Preferred Effect size F
Student Cohesiveness 4.22 4.59 0.64 0.56 0.62 16.19** Teacher Support 3.95 4.31 0.83 0.74 0.45 12.17** Equity 3.89 4.41 0.88 0.72 0.65 15.34** Task Clarity 4.25 4.67 0.70 0.59 0.65 16.68** Responsibility for Learning 4.01 4.24 0.74 0.71 0.32 8.62** Involvement 3.49 4.02 0.90 0.88 0.60 16.37** Task Orientation 4.41 4.28 0.63 0.84 0.35 12.05** Personal Relevance 3.83 4.63 0.94 0.63 0.50 14.32** Collaboration 3.80 4.23 0.79 0.78 0.56 13.78** N = 574 students in 31 classes. **p < .01.
The effect size is the difference in means expressed in standard deviation units and was calculated using the formula: d = M1 – M2 / √[(σ12 + σ22) / 2].
172
Figure 5.1. Average item means for the actual and preferred responses to the CCQ-P
To examine the magnitude of the differences between the actual and preferred means, the corresponding effect sizes (calculated as the difference in means divided by the pooled standard deviation) were calculated for each scale as recommended by Thompson (2001). With the exception of two scales (Responsibility for Learning and Task Orientation), the effect sizes were all greater than 0.40, ranging between nearly half a standard deviation (effect size of 0.45 for Teacher Support) and two-thirds of a standard deviation (effect size of 0.65 for Equity and Task Clarity). According to Cohen’s (2013) criteria, these effect sizes can be considered to be medium in magnitude, indicating that the results were of practical significance. The two exceptions, Responsibility for Learning and Task Orientation, had effect sizes of 0.32 and 0.35, respectively. These effect sizes, according to Cohen’s (2013) criteria, are considered to be small.
173
5.2.2 Actual and Preferred Differences in Students’ Perceptions of their ICT Use
Two of the five scales of the ICT Usage Survey12 involved both actual and preferred
response formats (the Investigating with ICT and Communicating with ICT scales). The average item means, reported in Table 5.2, indicated that, for both of these scales, students’ preferred responses were higher than their actual responses. These results suggested that students would prefer more frequent opportunities to investigate and communicate using ICT than they currently perceived to be present in the classroom.
A one-way MANOVA was used to determine whether there were statistically significant differences between students’ actual and preferred responses for these two scales. The multivariate test yielded significant results (p < .01) in terms of Wilks’s lambda criterion (Wilks, 1935), and, therefore, the univariate ANOVA was interpreted for each scale. The results, reported in Table 5.2, indicated that there were statistically significant (p < .01) actual–preferred differences for both ICT Usage Survey scales.
The effect sizes were calculated to examine the magnitude of the actual–preferred mean score differences. The results, reported in Table 5.2, indicated that the effect sizes were greater than 0.40 standard deviations for both the Investigating with ICT scale (effect size = 0.53 standard deviations) and Communicating with ICT (effect size = 0.70 standard deviations). According to Cohen’s (2013) criteria, these effect sizes are moderate in magnitude, indicating that the results were of practical significance.
This section (Section 5.2) has summarised the results related to students’ actual– preferred perceptual differences in relation to both the learning environment and their use of ICT in the classroom (research objective 2). When examining student perceptions of both their learning environment and their use of ICT, the results suggested that (with the exception of task orientation), students would prefer a more positive learning environment and greater opportunities to use ICT than they currently perceive to be present. The following section (Section 5.3) examines the results of the present survey related to research objective 3.
174
Table 5.2. Average item means, average item standard deviations, and differences between means (effect size and MANOVA results) for the actual and preferred responses to the ICT Usage Survey
ICT Usage Survey scale
Average item mean Average item
standard deviation
Difference between means
Actual Preferred Actual Preferred Effect
Size F
Investigating with ICT 3.25 3.76 0.95 0.99 0.53 13.09**
Communicating with ICT 2.40 3.18 1.02 1.19 0.70 15.77**
N = 574 students in 31 classes. **p < .01; *p < .05.
The effect size is the difference in means expressed in standard deviation units and was calculated using the formula: d = M1 – M2 / √[(σ12 + σ22) / 2].