Online survey

An online survey (Appendix G) was used (i) to collect demographic data; (ii) to identify such enabling and disabling factors as had been suggested by the literature and (iii) to establish how

and why teachers used technology in their teaching and learning. The purpose of the online survey was to gather initial comprehensive data about teachers’ experience of using technology in their teaching and learning, and to refine the interviews and observation schedules. The survey served as a means of identifying teachers who were prepared to be contacted for one- on-one interviews and classroom observation, the core methods of data generation (Cohen et al., 2008; Khan, 2009). The questions in the survey were shaped by (i) the elements and socio- economic challenges of technology integration cited in the literature review and (ii) the priorities of the conceptual framework.

To design the online survey, the researcher had recourse to the ‘formstack’ application. She followed three steps when developing the questions using this application (Cohen et al., 2000:257; 2008).

Step one: The aim of questions 1-5 was to secure the interest of the NQTs and enable them to feel comfortable about completing the survey. The questions were factual, comparatively straightforward and easy to respond to (Dane, 2011; Cohen et al., 2008). The teachers answered questions about their age, gender, the phase they were currently teaching, the type of schools they taught at (fee-paying or no-fee-paying), and how often they used technology.

Step two: Questions 6, 7 and 8 included both closed and open-ended questions. The closed question items were adopted in part from previous studies and adapted to suit the needs of this project and conditions in South Africa (Dinh, 2009; Chen, 2010; McGill et al., 2014; Mai & Hong, 2014). The aim was to determine, through a frequency count, enabling and disabling factors in respect of NQTs’ ability to integrate technology into their tuition, the central topic of this enquiry.

Step three: In the open-ended sections in Questions 6, 7 and 8, teachers were asked to suggest other items applicable to them not listed in the survey. Questions 9, 10 and 11 were open-ended. Cohen et al. (2000:255) observe that “it is the open-ended responses that might contain the gems of information that otherwise might not be caught in the questionnaire”. Question 12 invites NQTs to work further with the researcher by providing individual email addresses. Before the online survey was sent to the selected NQTs, it was piloted in July 2014. Two in- service teachers, who were not part of the sample, were asked to complete the questions. After they had completed the questions, they were given a blank sheet of paper on which to comment on the following issues:

 Poorly worded questions;

 Questions that could be misunderstood;  Unclear choice of options;

 Clarity of instructions;

 Whether the language in the survey was consonant with the reading ability of the population;

 Whether questions were visually appealing; and

 Whether categories were appropriate (Fraenkel et al., 2012:401; Lowe, 2007:58; Lodico et al., 2006:112).

By piloting this online survey, the researcher was able to determine the time it took to open the web link and respond to the questionnaire. It took between ten and fifteen minutes to download and complete the questionnaire (Cohen et al., 2008; Arthur et al., 2012; Lambert, 2012). The following issues were addressed as a result of the two teachers’ responses:

 The survey was divided into five sections with headings for easy understanding (structure);

 The researcher adjusted the font size and spacing of the survey questions in order to make reading them easier;

 A sentence was added at the end of the survey asking respondents to check that they had completed all the questions and thanking them for their participation. This added sentence improved the structure of the online survey; and

 A new theme termed ‘pre-service training’ was added to the survey, arguably refining its content.

In August 2014, this once-off, online survey (https://cput-efywf.formstack.com/forms/tibac), together with approval letters from the University Ethics Committee (Appendix A) and WCED (Appendix B), was sent to 94 teachers through their emails and mobile telephones. The introduction to the email invited teachers to respond to the survey within a month.

Seventy-four (78.7%) teachers responded to the survey. The high response rate may be attributable to three aspects: (i) the introduction explained the significance of the study. According to Bless et al. (2013) providing an introduction that convinces respondents of the importance of the study can raise the response rate; (ii) confidentiality was guaranteed (Morrell & Carroll, 2010; Dane, 2011; Fraenkel et al., 2012); and (iii) questions were simple,

straightforward, the length of the questionnaire was limited to two and a half pages, and the layout was clear.

The online survey was convenient for the teachers to reply to: participants could respond to it at any time and place, as long as they had data bundles or access to the Internet. The majority of teachers were digital natives who used technology daily for communication and entertainment, and therefore had no difficulty about responding online. Regular reminders via telephone calls and emails may have increased the response rate (Cohen et al., 2008). The anonymity or “non-traceability” of the questionnaire encouraged NQTs to respond, though some of them did not seek anonymity and provided their emails to be contacted again (Cohen et al., 2000:246). All participants were involved in a technological project during their pre- service training that had ostensibly equipped them to teach with technology. This exposure may have increased their readiness to complete the online questionnaire (Lodico et al., 2006). The chief advantage of using the online survey was that it was more economical to administer to 94 teachers than conventional post: the online web link was sent to teachers’ emails and mobile telephones (Gill & Johnson, 2002; Blaxter et al., 2010). Online surveys are inexpensive since there is no cost involved in printing or posting letters. The survey included closed questions that were quick to answer. Because participants could complete the survey at their convenience, the teachers had enough time to think deeply before responding to the open-ended questions (Lowe, 2007; Fraenkel et al., 2012). The data from the survey was automatically imported into an Excel program which saved time. The researcher would otherwise have been obliged to capture the data manually (Cohen et al., 2008; Dane, 2011; Fraenkel et al., 2012). E- mail responses reduced the possibility for human error associated with the manual capture of data (Cohen et al., 2008).

Against the many advantages of using the online survey, one distinct disadvantage was that the researcher could not be present to answer questions from individual respondents, explain instructions that may have been misinterpreted (Dane, 2011) or assess unwritten aspects such as body language, facial expression or tone of voice. To address the issue of misinterpretation, the researcher provided the respondents with her contact details in the introduction to the survey. Complex terms were defined in the survey for the sake of clarity (Lodico et al., 2006). For example, ‘technology’ was defined as “all educational technology hardware and software programs that teachers use for teaching and learning”. Instructions in the survey were formulated in simple English and made as clear as possible.