Use of Ict in Education
A FRAMEWORK FOR EVALUATING ICT USE IN TEACHER
EDUCATION
A case study of the Primary Teacher training Colleges in Kenya
Submitted by
OREDO JOHN OTIENO
To Strathmore University as a dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Science in Information Technology
(MSc.IT)
August 2008
DECLARATION
I certify that this dissertation is my original work and all material in this dissertation which is not my own work has been identified. I further certify that no material has previously been submitted and approved for the award of a degree by this or any other
University.
This dissertation is available for library use on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the dissertation may be published without proper acknowledgement. SIGNED……………………………………………….DATE………………………..
Oredo John Otieno
FIT/047575/06
This project report has been submitted for examination with my approval as the
University Supervisor.
SIGNED……………………………………………………………DATE…………….
Freddie R. Acosta, PhD.
Director – Academic and Research and
Senior Lecturer – Faculty of Information Technology
Strathmore University
i
DEDICATION
To my parents, who worked so hard to ensure we got an education despite the many difficulties.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
My immense gratitude to almighty God for the gift of life and good health, without which I would not reach this far.
I thank my research project supervisor Dr. Freddie Acosta, for the invaluable time he spent discussing with me the progress of this project.
I would also like to acknowledge the tremendous input this piece of work received from Mr.
Kweyu, Mr. Oketch and Mr. Kandiri, all of Strathmore University, Faculty of Information
Technology. Thanks for the time you availed to read this work and the informative discussions we had during the initial stages of this project. Thanks to Mark Sudi, who ran the errands and entered the data collected into the computer for analysis.
Great thanks to the Strathmore School community. Each one of you lent a hand directly or indirectly towards this effort.
To all my friends – hats off, thanks for the tremendous support you have always given me unconditionally. A big asante sana to you all.
iii
Abstract
Teachers are under increasing pressure to use Information and Communication Technology to impart to students the knowledge, skills and attitudes they need to survive in the twenty first century. The teaching profession needs to migrate from a teacher-centred lecture based instruction, o a student–centred interactive learning environment. To attain this aspiration, an ICT enabled teacher education is fundamental. Towards this end, international and national authorities have been spending huge sums of money to facilitate the implementation of ICT teacher education. This work attempts to evaluate the usage of the available ICT facilities in the Kenyan public primary teacher colleges focusing on the quantity of computer use, focus of computer use, and the levels attained in terms of using ICTs to support, expand and transform teaching and learning.
The study shows that the quantity of computer use is still very low and that there is a wide rhetoric-reality gap. The bigger chunk of time spent on computers is used to learn ICT skills.
Since the tool used to perform the evaluation was developed for use in primary schools
(Computer Use Framework), the study proposes a more expanded evaluation framework that can be used to evaluate ICTs in teacher education.
iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ICT
Information and Communication Technology
UNESCO
United Nations Education, Social and Cultural Organization
MDGs
Millennium Development Goals
EFA
Education For All
KESSP
Kenya Education Sector Support Program
ERS
Economic Recovery Strategy
MOEST
Ministry Of Education, Science, and Technology
CPF
Computer Practice Framework
PTTCs
Primary Teacher Training Colleges
SITE
Society for Information and Teacher Education
ISTE
International Society for Technology in Education
v
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1:Computer Practice Framework (Twining, 2002) ............................................ 12
Figure 2-2: Framework for ICTs in Teacher Education (UNESCO, 2002) ...................... 13
Figure 3-1:Research Conceptual Framewor...................................................................... 17
Figure 3-2: Distribution of Primary Teacher Colleges in Kenya (Kenya Country Report,
InfoDev, 2007) .................................................................................................................. 19
Figure 3-3:Data Collection Methods................................................................................. 22
Figure 3-4:The Fraction of Time Computers are in Use compared to Total learning time
........................................................................................................................................... 26
Figure 3-5: The Focus of Computer use............................................................................ 27
Figure 3-6:The Mode of Computer use as a Learning Tool.............................................. 27
Figure 4-1:The Total Quantity of Computer Use by teachers in PTTCs .......................... 30
Figure 4-2:Comparison of Quantity of Computer Use by teachers in the sampled
PTTCs................................................................................................................................ 32
Figure 4-3:Quantity of Computer Use by students in the sampled PTTCs.................... 33
Figure 4-4:Comparison of Quantity of Computer Use by students in the sampled
PTTCs................................................................................................................................ 34
Figure 4-5:Overall Quantity of Computer Use by both teachers and students in the sampled PTTCs ............................................................................................................... 35
Figure 4-6:The Focus of Computer Use by teachers in PTTCs ........................................ 37
Figure 4-7:Summary of Focus of use by teachers in each of the sampled PTTCs ........... 38
Figure 4-8:Focus of Computer Use by students in the sampled PTTCs ........................ 39
Figure 4-9:Comparison of Focus of Computer Use by students in the sampled PTTCs . 40
Figure 4-10:Overall Focus of Computer Use by both teachers and students in the sampled PTTCs ................................................................................................................ 41
Figure 4-11:Use of ICT in teaching and learning in each of the sampled PTTCs ............ 43
Figure 4-12:Use of ICT as a teaching and Learning tool in the sampled PTTCs ............. 44
vi
Figure 4-13:Summary of Teachers general level of expertise in ICT in the sampled
PTTCs................................................................................................................................ 46
Figure 4-14:Summary of Students general level of expertise in ICT in the sampled
PTTCs................................................................................................................................ 48
Figure 4-15:Average levels of expertise of both teachers and students in ICT in the sampled PTTCs ................................................................................................................. 50
Figure 4-16:Summary of the evaluation results using CPF .............................................. 51
Figure 5-1:Conceptual Framework for ICT Monitoring and Evaluation (InfoDev, 2005)53
Figure 5-2:The Proposed Framework ............................................................................... 55
Figure 5-3:Average response to the proposed competencies and indicators for the proposed evaluation framework. ....................................................................................... 57
Figure 6-1:The Implementation Plan ................................................................................ 65
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3-1:Primary Teacher Training Colleges in Kenya by Province .............................. 20
Table 3-2:The Sample percentages for Teaches ............................................................... 21
Table 3-3:The Sample percentages for Students............................................................... 21
Table 3-4:Teachers’ Questionnaire breakdown ................................................................ 23
Table 3-5:Students’ Questionnaire breakdown ................................................................. 23
Table 3-6:Teachers and Students Interviewed. ................................................................. 24
Table 3-7:The Secondary Sources of Data........................................................................ 25
Table 4-1: Quantity of Computer Use by Teachers. ......................................................... 29
Table 4-2:Summary of the Quantity of Computer Use by Teachers................................. 30
Table 4-3:Comparison of Quantity of Computer Use by teachers in the sampled PTTCs31
Table 4-4:Summary of Quantity of Computer Use by Students ....................................... 33
Table 4-5:Comparison of Quantity of Computer Use by Students in the sampled PTTCs
........................................................................................................................................... 34
Table 4-6:Overall Quantity of Computer Use by both Students and Teachers................. 35
Table 4-7:Focus of Computer Use by teachers in the sampled PTTCs ............................ 36
Table 4-8:Summary of Focus of use by teachers in each of the sampled PTTCs............. 37
Table 4-9:Summary of Focus of use by teachers in each of the sampled PTTCs............. 38
Table 4-10:Focus of Computer Use by Teachers and Students the sampled PTTCs........ 40
Table 4-11:Use of Computers as a Teaching and Learning tool by teachers in each of the sampled PTTCs ................................................................................................................. 42
Table 4-12:Summary of Teachers general level of expertise in the sampled PTTCs ...... 45
Table 4-13:Summary of Students general level of expertise in the sampled PTTCs....... 47
Table 4-14:Summary of general level of expertise for both students and Teachers in the sampled PTTCs ................................................................................................................. 49
viii
Table 5-1:Comparison of terminologies used in the general framework for evaluating ICT in education and the Proposed framework for evaluating ICT in teacher education. ....... 54
Table 5-2:Ranking of the proposed competencies and indicators by teachers. ................ 56
Table 5-3: Breakdown of the Mode dimension of Computer Use .................................... 62
Table 5-4: Suggested Indicators of each aspect of Mode of Computer Use ..................... 63
ix
LIST OF PICTURES
Picture 9-1: Students using computers in one of the Primary Teacher Training Colleges90
Picture 9-2:A typical computer laboratory in a Primary Teacher College........................ 91
Picture 9-3:This computer laboratory in one of the Primary Teacher Training Colleges has Internet connection through a Pre-paid ADSL provided by Telcom Kenya .............. 92
x
CONTENTS
Declaration………………………………………………………………………………i
Dedication………………………………………………………………………………..ii
Acknowledgement……………………………………………………………………….iii
Abstract………………………………………………………………………………….iv
List of Abbreviations……………………………………………………………………v
List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………vi
List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………vii
List of Pictures…………………………………………………………………………viii
1.
INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................... 1
1.1
Background..................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2
Curriculum Evaluation .................................................................................................................. 3
1.3
ICT in Teacher Education ............................................................................................................. 3
1.4
Statement of the Problem .............................................................................................................. 4
1.5
Research Questions ........................................................................................................................ 4
1.6
Purpose of the Study ...................................................................................................................... 5
1.7
Significance of the Study................................................................................................................ 5
2.
LITERATURE REVIEW......................................................................................... 6
2.1
Education in Kenya ........................................................................................................................ 6
2.2
Teacher Education in Kenya ......................................................................................................... 7
2.3
ICT in Teacher Education ............................................................................................................. 9
2.4
Evaluation of ICT in Education .................................................................................................. 10
2.5
Evaluation Frameworks............................................................................................................... 11
2.5.1 The Computer Practice Framework (CPF)...................................................................................... 11
2.5.2
A Framework for ICTs in Teacher Education ........................................................................... 13
2.6
3.
3.1
The Need for an Eclectic Model .................................................................................................. 16
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .......................................................................... 17
Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 17
xi
3.2
Study Population .......................................................................................................................... 18
3.3
Sample Population........................................................................................................................ 21
3.4
Data Collection Methods.............................................................................................................. 22
3.4.1
Questionnaires ........................................................................................................................... 23
3.4.2
Interviews .................................................................................................................................. 24
3.4.3
Secondary Sources..................................................................................................................... 24
3.5
4.
Analysis and Presentation............................................................................................................ 26
RESEARCH FINDINGS, PRESENTATION, AND ANALYSIS....................... 29
4.1
Quantity of Computer Use........................................................................................................... 29
4.1.1
Quantity of Computer Use by Teachers .................................................................................... 29
4.1.2
Quantity of Computer Use by Students ..................................................................................... 33
4.1.3
Quantity of Computer Use by Teachers and Students Combined.............................................. 35
4.2
Focus of Computer Use ................................................................................................................ 36
4.2.1
Focus of Computer Use by Teachers ......................................................................................... 36
4.2.2
Focus of Computer Use by Students.......................................................................................... 38
4.2.3
Focus of Computer Use by Teachers and Students Combined .................................................. 40
4.3
The Mode Dimension ................................................................................................................... 42
4.4
Summary of Results ..................................................................................................................... 51
4.5
Inference........................................................................................................................................ 52
5.
RECOMMENDED FRAMEWORK ..................................................................... 53
5.1
General Framework for ICT Monitoring and Evaluation in Education................................. 53
5.2
ICT in Teacher Education ........................................................................................................... 54
5.3
The Proposed Framework ........................................................................................................... 55
5.3.1
The Proposed Competencies...................................................................................................... 56
5.3.2
Development Context ................................................................................................................ 57
5.3.3
Computer Use ............................................................................................................................ 57
5.3.4
Focus of Use .............................................................................................................................. 58
5.3.5
ICT in Teacher Education Competencies .................................................................................. 58
5.3.6
Mode of Computer Use ............................................................................................................. 61
6.
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN................................................................................. 64
6.1
Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 64
6.2
A Three – Phase Implementation Scheme.................................................................................. 65
xii
7.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................ 66
8.
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 67
9.
APPENDICES ......................................................................................................... 71
9.1
Request Letter to Students .......................................................................................................... 71
9.2
Request Letter to Teachers.......................................................................................................... 72
9.3
Questionnaire for Teachers ......................................................................................................... 73
9.4
Questionnaire for Students .......................................................................................................... 79
9.5
Interview Schedule ....................................................................................................................... 85
9.6
ICT Initiatives and Projects (Kenya Country Report, InfoDev (2007).................................... 86
9.7
Pictures.......................................................................................................................................... 90
xiii
xiv
CHAPTER 1
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
During the past decade there has been an exponential growth in the use of information and communication technology (ICT) which has made pervasive impacts both on society and on our daily lives (Yuen, Law, Wong, 2003). ICT has become a principal driver of economic and social change worldwide. As ICTs become ubiquitous and embedded in society, they offer the potential to restructure organizations, promote collaboration, increase democratic participation of citizens, improve the transparency and responsiveness of governmental agencies, make education and healthcare more widely available, foster cultural creativity, and enhance the social integration of individuals with different abilities and groups of different cultural backgrounds (Kozma, 2005a).
Global and national policy makers have been putting effort into crafting policies to enable countries’ to cope with these demands and harness their effects to support economic growth. As
Kozma (2005b) ascertains, policy makers worldwide concur on the fact that education is among the public sectors that most affects – and is most affected by – these developments. Further, the improvement of educational systems and increased educational attainment are seen as primary ways that countries can prepare for these global, technology based changes. And within education, ICT is seen as a way to promote educational change, improve the skills of learners, and prepare them for the global economy and the information society (Haddad & Draxler, 2002;
UNESCO, 2002).
It is thus not surprising to find increasing interest, attention and investment being put into the use of ICT in education all over the world (Yuen, Law, and Wong, 2003). The desire of countries’ to be globally competitive, grow economically and improve social conditions is often used to up the ante for increased investment in educational improvement and the application of ICT in learning institutions. At the global level, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) which have been adopted by the United Nations as the key development targets for the 21st Century, mentions achievement of basic education as one of the prominent goals. This goal builds on the Education
For All (EFA) initiative which was hatched in Jomtien (Thailand) in 1990 and reaffirmed at a second EFA meeting in Dakar in 2000. In the Dakar meeting (UNESCO, 1990, 2000), item 69 explicitly states:
Information and communication technologies (ICT) must be harnessed to support EFA goals at an affordable cost. These technologies have great potential for knowledge
1
dissemination, effective learning and the development of more efficient education services. This potential will not be realized unless the new technologies serve rather than drive the implementation of education strategies. To be effective especially in developing countries, ICTs should be combined with more traditional technologies such as books and radios, and be more extensively applied to the training of teachers.
In tandem with the aforementioned international aspirations, different countries have attempted to craft national policies to guide and direct ICT integration into economic and social programs. In
Kenya, the first comprehensive and stakeholders-driven ICT policy was discussed and approved by the cabinet in January 2006 and an ICT policy document published through the Kenya
Government Gazette notice No. 24 in March 2006 (KIC, 2006). The mission of this policy is a
“Prosperous ICT-driven Kenyan society”, which puts ICT in the centre of national development
(Kashorda, Waema, 2007). The policy, among other national policy areas, addresses issues of
ICT in education in general. The policy aims at encouraging the use of ICT and promoting the growth and development of e-learning across all levels of education in a bid to leverage learning and teaching.
Drawing from the aspirations of the national ICT policy, the Ministry of Education, Science, and
Technology through Sessional Paper No 5 of 2004 on a policy framework for education, training, and research whose vision is “quality education and training for development” targets to achieve
Education for All (EFA) by 2015 (MOEST, 2005). The kernel of the policy is “to integrate ICT education and training into education and training systems in order to prepare learners and staff of today for the Kenyan economy of tomorrow and therefore enhance the nation’s ICT skills”. In
2006, the Ministry of Education crafted the “National Information and Communication
Technology Strategy for Education and Training”, a sector-wide five-year ICT strategy document. The document was developed in line with the sessional paper No. 1 of 2005, national
ICT policy of 2006, Kenya Education Sector Support Program (KESSP) framework, Economic
Recovery Strategy for Wealth Creation (ERS), e-Government strategy of 2004, and the
Millennium Development Goals. The strategy contains details of the strategic objectives, expected outcomes and implementation log frames.
The mission of the strategy is to integrate ICT in education and training for improved access, learning and administration (MOEST, 2006). ICT in the education sector can be clustered in terms of e-Government (which aims at mainstreaming ICT in all government operations, education inclusive), EMIS (Education Management Information Systems whose aim is to furnish education managers and administrators with accurate and timely data for better and informed
2
decision-making) and E-Learning (which aims at mainstreaming ICTs in the teaching and learning process (MOEST, 2006). One way of doing this is through equipping learning institutions, especially secondary schools, and training educators on how to profitably use technology. In the ministry’s ICT integration into education implementation framework, the process has been divided into: review of the ICT policy at a cost of Ksh.6.3 billion and provision of ICT equipment to learning institutions at a cost of Ksh.7.8 billion (MOEST, 2006). This huge investment planned on the entire process of integrating ICTs into education requires that a standard model be used in evaluating how technologies are being used to improve learning and teaching. 1.2
Curriculum Evaluation
The term evaluation has been used to express a variety of meanings and to describe many processes that can leave a considerable amount of confusion on its trail. Lewy (1973) defines evaluation as a process that sets out to judge the merits and deficiencies of a particular educational program produced and administered within a particular context. Another stream of scholars define evaluation as the process of gathering of evidence on the attainment of objectives, forming a judgment on the basis of that evidence, and a weighing of that evidence in the light of the objectives (Taba, 1962). According to Scriven (1967), the aim of any evaluation activity must be “the estimation of merit, worth, and value”. Evaluation is known to serve a critical role in the curriculum, teaching and learning. Indeed, the scope of evaluation determines the types or levels of learning that will get emphasis (Brown, 1961). This paper will adopt the term evaluation as defined by Taba.
1.3
ICT in Teacher Education
Education is at the confluence of powerful and rapidly shifting educational, technological and political forces that will shape the structure of educational systems across the globe (UNESCO,
2002). As noted by the UNESCO World Education Report (1998), the ICTs challenge traditional conceptions of both teaching and learning by configuring how teachers and learners gain access to knowledge. ICTs in teacher education will be used in this context to mean teacher education in
ICTs and teacher education through ICTs.
3
1.4
Statement of the Problem
According to InfoDev (2005), even after over a decade of ICT use in the education sector in developing countries, the ICT for education and development communities are still hard pressed to present satisfactory answers to the following basic question:
•
What is the impact of ICT use in education?
•
What are the good models and lessons that we can learn from, and are these models and lessons scaleable?
•
What does all these cost?
Since the integration of technology into education is an enormous endevour given the country’s poor state of technological infrastructure and manpower, there is, therefore, a need for a systematic evaluation of all the activities of ICT in education. Kashorda and Waema (2007) assert that one of the weaknesses of the Kenya’s national ICT policy is the lack of explicit targets that could be used for policy analysis and evaluation.
From the ICT in education policy paper (MOEST 2005b), it is clear that comprehensive indicators need to be developed to reflect the goals indicated in the ICT in education policy documents. The paper identifies the following as key areas for evaluation:
•
Infrastructure and Access
•
Training and Usage
•
Impacts
This research is intended to come up with a hybrid model that can be used to evaluate the level of
ICT use in education in general but with special reference to PTTCs.
1.5
Research Questions
1. What are the facets of ICT use in education that need to be evaluated to ascertain the worth of ICT investment?
2. To what extent is the CPF relevant in evaluating the impact of ICT investment in education? 3. What dimensions need to be incorporated into CPF to make it relevant for
evaluating ICTs in teacher education?
4
1.6
Purpose of the Study
1. To evaluate the overall use of ICTs using the Computer Practice Framework (CPF)
2. To identify the strengths and the weaknesses of CPF in evaluating ICT use in PTTCs in
Kenya.
3. To improve the CPF to meet evaluation needs of ICTs in teacher education.
1.7
Significance of the Study
As technological advances continue to evolve and proliferate, educators and administrators have sought to integrate technological innovations into the classroom. Introducing ICTs in the education sector can be quite costly in terms of up-front capital costs (for acquiring basic infrastructure) and the recurrent costs (maintenance and human resources training and development). With this rise in implementation and demand comes an increased need to evaluate the effectiveness of technology in education (Owston, 1999, 2000; Windschilt, 1998). A proper evaluation of ICT use in education in general and PTTCs in particular will help us to learn from past experiences, improve service delivery, plan and allocate resources, evaluate policies, and demonstrate results as part of accountability to key stakeholders (World Bank, 2004).
This is important since a bigger chunk of our implementation funds are to be provided for by our development partners and volunteers. The stakeholders will want to know whether the performance indicators are being achieved
5
CHAPTER 2
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
Education in Kenya
Africans had an education system even before the coming of the Europeans. This education system – Traditional African Education (TAE) trained individuals to fit into their societies as useful members through providing skills, knowledge and values relevant to the society. It played the role of socializing individuals to fit and participate adequately in the development of society
(Eshiwani, 1993). Formal education or western education was introduced in Kenya in the nineteenth century by the arrival of John Krapf and Jonathan Rebmann of the Church Missionary
Society (CMS) in 1844 and 1846 respectively (Anderson, 1970; Sheffield, 1973; Furley &
Watson, 1978). They translated the Bible into Kiswahili and started boarding schools for the sons of Chiefs at Rabai Mpya in Mombasa among the Rabai people (Bogonko, 1992). The major aim of missionary education was to produce African “priests” to spread the word of God (Eshiwani,
1993).
Missionaries controlled education in Kenya up to about 1911 when the colonial government stepped in and created a department of education which culminated in the emergence of the first government schools for Africans (Eshiwani,1993). According to Eshiwani (1993) the aim of the colonial education was to create a labour force including chiefs and headmen capable of participating in and perpetuating the indirect rule. The first colonial government’s serious plan for education came in the name of “The Ten Year Plan for the Development of African Education” in 1948 (Bogonko, 1992). The 10-year plan was not received by well by Africans because it did not provide for higher education or make an allowance for compulsory education. It was therefore superceded by the Beecher Education Commission Report of 1949 (Bogonko, 1992). The
Beecher commission enquired into the scope, method and content of African education, its financing and African teachers’ salaries. The report which was implemented in 1952 restructured
African education and renamed its sections as Primary, Intermediate, and Secondary.
Kenya’s struggle for political independence served as a major springboard for her educational development and transformation. Because the colonial legacy consisted of racial system of education – meant to exploit African labour and resources (Eshiwani, 1993), it behooved the
Kenyan government to develop a new education policy and strategy at independence. The
Sessional Paper No. 10 of 1965 served as an important document to address the immediate needs
6
and goals of post–independence education. From 1964-1975, the education structure and development was based on the educational goals and objectives in the Ominde Commission of
1964 whose emphasis was the expansion of education to provide the necessary manpower, economic development and Kenyanization in all sectors (Eshiwani,1993). When the government realized that education was not achieving the desired objectives, a second commission was formed. The National Committee on Educational Objectives and Policies (NCEOP), or the
Gachathi Commission, produced its report in 1976 which recommended a change in education system (Eshiwani, 1993 p28). The report stated in part:
The schools as they are today, do not have capability, time, even motivation to teach the values of the society. This is because the schools are geared entirely to the passing of formal examinations … The questions now, therefore, is how the education system is to build into an organized system of teaching the values of society to the youth
(NCEOP,1976 p.28)
This concern necessitated the setting up of the Presidential Working Party on the Second
University in Kenya, popularly known as the Mackay Commission in 1981. The report stated in part: Education is aimed at enabling the youths to play a more effective role in the life of the nation by imparting to them necessary skills and knowledge and inculcating the right attitude. In practice, however, formal education has tended to concentrate on imparting knowledge for the sake of passing examinations (PWCSU, 1981)
The present 8-4-4 system of education is a product of the Mackay commission’s recommendation. It is geared towards practical and technical education with its objectives summarized by MOE (1984) as follows:
Kenya has one fundamental goal for her education: to prepare and equip the youth to be happy and useful members of Kenyan society. To be happy, they must learn and accept the national values and to be useful they must actively work towards the maintenance and development of the society.
In order to achieve the aims of any education system and to maintain any quality education, the question of teachers becomes paramount. According to OECD (1989), teachers are at the heart of the educational process and therefore, the greater the importance attached to education as a whole, the higher the priority that must be accorded to the teacher responsible for that education.
2.2
Teacher Education in Kenya
The development of teacher education in Kenya can be traced back to the middle of the 19th century when freed slaves were admitted to the Sharanpur Nasik in India to train as teachers
7
amongst other courses in 1860 (Bogonko, 1993). These people returned to Kenya in the 1970s and became pioneers in promoting Christianity and education. Most of the teacher training in
Kenya by the mid 1920s was on the job except high school which was said by the Phelps-Stokes
Commission to be giving good teacher education (Bogonko, 1993). Missionaries dominated the training of teachers up to the eve of independence (Eshiwani, 1999) and virtually every missionary body had teacher training facilities at one or more of its central stations(Bogonko,
1993). By 1930s, the CMS trained their teachers at Kahuhia, Butere, and Kaloleni, Giriama; the
CSM at Kikuyu and Tumutumu. The Roman Catholics trained their teachers at Kabaa and St.
Mary’s Yala. Other centres of training were, Kamagambo(SDA), Kaimosi (Friends Church),
Kima (Church of God Mission). By 1931 there were 15 teacher training institutions of which the missionaries managed 12 while the government managed 3 (Bogonko, 1993).
Despite all the efforts by the missionaries to train the teachers, their general standards were lamentably low (Bogonko,1993). To improve the standard of African education, the standards of teaching had to be raised. The Beecher report (1949) advocated the expansion and improvement of teacher training facilities so as to improve the quality of teachers and as well as replace the untrained teachers with trained ones. In 1962, all the schools were integrated and a unified teaching profession created.
The consolidation of the teaching process in the country has
improved the qualification and quality of primary teachers. The certification of primary school teachers is divided in three levels: P1, P2 and P3. Currently about 75% of the students are admitted at P1 after passing O level examinations. All the three categories receive a pre-service training of two years. Currently there are 20 primary teacher training colleges in Kenya spread across all the provinces.
Due to the fact that teachers are multipliers and key agents in respect to educational change, continuing calls for raising standards of student learning and achievement have now focused national policies upon the quality of teachers and their teaching in classroom (Day, 1999). In
Kenya, according to MOEST(2005), the government is committed to the improvement of primary teacher education to the standards of the latest international trends including equipping the institutions with ICT equipment. Currently, Kenya has 20 primary teacher training colleges all of which are equipped with computers.
8
2.3
ICT in Teacher Education
Computers and related technologies are increasingly influencing many aspects of our social and work lives as well as many of our leisure activities (Teo, Chai, & Leee, 2008) and they have the potential to transform the nature of education (UNESCO, 2002). Education, one of the man’s oldest social activities, is slowly catching the wind of these new computer mediated technologies.
These new technologies, coupled with a worldwide challenge to educate all children, has led to a global reform and development of teacher education (Moon, 2004). Given that teachers act as the change agents for technology in education (Zhao, Hueyshan & Mishra, 2001), it is essential that in-service and pre-service teachers have basic ICT skills and competencies.(UNESCO, 2002).
UNESCO (2000) emphasizes that teachers, professors and school administration staff must be given training that enable them to integrate ICTs into their teaching programs.
It is therefore widely accepted that ICTs must be an essential component in teacher education. In fact, the question amongst the proponents of ICT use in education is no longer “if” but rather
“which” and “how” these technologies can be effectively implemented. At the regional level,
Nepad (2001) has articulated in its agenda that a functional education that integrates ICT into educational instruction and especially into the training of teachers should come into effect between 2006 and 2015. Many countries, Kenya included, are engaged in a number of efforts to effect changes in the teaching and learning processes to prepare students for information and technology based society (UNESCO, 2002). Towards this end, The National Information and
Communication Technology Strategy for Education and Training (MOEST, 2006), recognizes that the integration of technology to support teaching and learning is necessary to improve learning outcomes and prepare students for the demanding job markets.
In spite of these efforts and aspirations towards enhancing the use of ICTs in teacher education,
Salmon and Perkins (1996) express concern about the effectiveness of these innovations in education. According to Nepad (2001), one of the major problems of introducing ICT to the training of teachers in Africa is the appropriation and distribution of budgets necessary for the implementations. Many scholars fear that the payoff of spending for technology in education is not being empirically evaluated. ( Ehrmann, 1999). A bottleneck to the effective evaluation of technology is that technology evolves at such a fast pace that often times the conclusions from summative studies are often out-dated by the time they are completed (Heincke et al, 1999). Fast-paced
9
technological development also makes it difficult for researchers to do theoretically grounded and rigorous research that should guide the development and adoption of technology in learning environments (Alavi & Leidner, 2001). In essence there should be a pedagogically grounded reason for adopting a new technology for educational purposes. Ehrmann (1999) suggests that we study which teaching and learning strategies facilitate the learning process and then study which technologies best support these teaching and learning strategies.
The above issues are meant to stimulate educators, administrators and other stakeholders to plan an evaluation component into the theoretically grounded adoption of new technologies in the classroom. While most researchers in the field would take cudgels with this position, Ehrmann
(1995) cautions evaluators about making decisions solely based on the unit cost of a program, because this can be difficult to estimate. Evaluations of technology based on the principles of teaching and learning will surely bring us a step forward in understanding not only which technologies work best, but why.
Kenya has placed considerable emphasis on the importance of ICT in its Education Sector
Support Programme (KESSP) as evidenced in the promulgation of the National ICT Strategy for
Education and Training. The Ministry of Education has taken steps to support the implementation of the strategy either by direct action or through the various institutions and agencies with which it works. In addition, there are many other organizations not involved directly with the Ministry of Education that continue to be active in implementing and supporting projects involving ICT in education. Information about some of these organizations have been synthesized and presented in
Appendix 9.6.
2.4
Evaluation of ICT in Education
Most discussions on educational evaluation refer to particular locales (for example, the classroom or the province) or particular purposes (for example, achievement or selection), and models of evaluation are similarly limited. A myriad methods and technologies have been in the past used to evaluate technology and learning. The argument has been that since learning environments and stakeholder interests are multi-faceted, it is impossible to use a single evaluation method. Owston
(2000) states that one model or framework is unlikely to capture the complexity of the relationship between technology and learning, especially in a view of pedagogical, organizational, institutional and technical issues. To account for this complexity, evaluators and researchers have developed several evaluation frameworks.
10
2.5
Evaluation Frameworks
Current approaches to course evaluation particularly in higher education, still seem to follow the paradigm laid by Bloom (1970) when he defined evaluation as a process of determining the achievement of specific educational objectives.
Among the many methods to the evaluation of technology and instruction in the literature, theorists (Jackson, 1990; Young, 2002) note six major ones: describing the universe, applying criteria, comparing institutions, improving programs, identifying outcomes, and justifying programs. Bullock and Ory ( 2001) also mention three other types of evaluations that appear less often in the literature: illuminative (Stake, 1978), participatory (Cousins & Earl, 1992), and integrative (Draper, Brown, Hederson, & McAteer, 1996). Illuminative evaluations use qualitative techniques to describe the impact of technology. Measuring the impact of technology is not the main concern. Rather, the goal of this type of evaluation is to uncover problems, issues or concerns. Participatory evaluations “involve a partnership between evaluation personnel and different evaluation audiences” (Bullock & Ory 2000, P.318). Integrative evaluations are concerned with the goal of effectively integrating technology into a teaching and learning situation ( Bullock & Ory, 2000).
Literature suggests that there has been (and continues to be) substantial financial investment in computer use at all educational levels (e.g. Lemke & Coughlin, 1998; Twining & McCormick,
1999). The motivation for such investment is varied, but often justified in terms of the potential impact that computer use has to enhance students’ learning (Twining, 2002). This situation, in which substantial amount of money are being invested in ICT in education but are not having substantial impact in schools is not sustainable. In order to justify continuity of investment, evidence needs to be found of ICT’s use effectiveness, and ways need to be found to increase the impact of those investments. There is, therefore great need to enhance the impact of investing in computer use in education at all levels (Twining, 2002).
2.5.1 The Computer Practice Framework (CPF)
The CPF was researched Peter twining of Open University and was published in 2002. The CPF has been chosen as a basis for this research because of its simplicity while at the same time presenting a rich picture. The CPF comprises of three core dimensions called the Quantity, Focus, and Mode. Quantity evaluates the quantity of computer use as a proportion of the available learning time. The focus dimension identifies the objectives supported by the computer use, while
11
the mode is concerned with parameters that measure the impact of computer use on the curriculum (Twining, 2002).
Figure 2-1:Computer Practice Framework (Twining, 2002)
12
2.5.2
A Framework for ICTs in Teacher Education
According to UNESCO (2002), ICT in teacher education can be organized around four competencies as follows:
1. Content and Pedagogy – focused on teachers’ instructional practices and knowledge of the curriculum.
2. Collaboration and networking – acknowledges communicative potential of ICTs to extend learning beyond the classroom.
3. Technical issues – teachers update their skills with software and hardware as new generations of technology emerge.
4. Social/Emerging Issues – competence to acknowledge that technology brings with it new rights and responsibilities.
Figure 2-2: Framework for ICTs in Teacher Education (UNESCO, 2002)
13
2.6
The Need for an Eclectic Model
While the description and trialing of CPF was based in the context of primary schools, Twining
(2002) states that it can be applied in other educational contexts with minor modifications to the terminology used and exemplification provided. Twining, further notes that any conceptual framework inevitably has a value judgment about which aspects of practice are significant. It is on this backdrop that this research proposes a new eclectic model founded on the pillars of the
CPF model relevant for evaluation of computer use in teacher education. InfoDev (the
Information for Development Program) also observes in its report (infoDev, 2005) that no standard reference or methodology exists to evaluate ICT in education programmes including teacher education. This study proposes a triangulated approach by combining the CPF and the
UNESCO’s framework for ICTs in teacher education.
16
CHAPTER 3
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1
Introduction
The study takes in the CPF as its input. The CPF is then used to evaluate ICT use in PTTCs to enable the researcher identify its weaknesses and strengths. The framework is then improved towards a new framework that can effectively be used to evaluate ICT use in teacher education.
While the independent variables are derived from computer use within the institution, some extraneous factors may have some impact on the results. These factors may include computer use at home or cybercafés by respondents. An attempt has been made to capture these extraneous variables, but it is difficult to determine the extent to which they affect the results.
Figure 3-1:Research Conceptual Framewor
17
3.2
Study Population
This research was carried out in public Primary Teacher Training Colleges in Kenya. The PTTCs were chosen because they represent the basic teacher education institutions. The PTTCs also made a good research population for this study because of the government’s commitment in improving primary teacher education to make it more relevant to the needs of the country and in tandem with the latest international trends in teacher education (MOEST, 2005c).
Currently there are 20 public PTTCs in Kenya almost all of which have computer labs and are making bold efforts to establish and improve PTTC ICT capacity. The PTTCs enroll an average of 500 students annually for a two year course with 20 to 40 staff members. This leads to a population of 20,000 students and 800 teachers in all the PTTCs. Figure 3-2 below shows the distribution of teacher training colleges in Kenya.
18
Figure 3-2: Distribution of Primary Teacher Colleges in Kenya (Kenya Country Report, InfoDev,
2007)
19
Table 3-1:Primary Teacher Training Colleges in Kenya by Province
S.NO COLLEGE
ADDRESS
PROVINCE
1
ASUMBI
BOX 119 KISII
NYANZA
2
MOI BARINGO
BOX 1, SERETUNIN
RIFT VALLEY
3
BONDO
BOX 424, BONDO
NYANZA
4
EGOJI
PRIV.BAG, EGOJI
EASTERN
5
EREGI
BOX100, MARAGOLI
WESTERN
6
GARISSA
BOX 496, GARISSA
NORTH EASTERN
7
KAIMOSI
BOX TIRIKI
WESTERN
8
KAMWENJA
BOX 152, NYERI
CENTRAL
9
KERICHO
BOX 10, KERICHO
RIFT VALLEY
10
ST MARK’S KIGARI
PRI.BAG, EMBU
EASTERN
11
KILIMAMBOGO
BOX 8, THIKA
CENTRAL
12
MACHAKOS
BOX 124,MACHAKOS
EASTERN
13
MERU
BOX 46, MERU
EASTERN
14
MIGORI
BOX 123, SUNA
NYANZA
15
MOSORIOT
BOX 100, MOSORIOT
RIFT VALLEY
16
MURANGA
BOX 232, MAKUYU
CENTRAL
17
NAROK
BOX 709, NAROK
RIFT VALLEY
18
SHANZU
BOX 90533,MOMBASA
COAST
19
TAMBACH
PRIV.BAG, TAMBACH
RIFT VALLEY
20
THOGOTO
BOX KIKUYU
CENTRAL
20
3.3
Sample Population
A sample of 8 colleges was picked from the 20 colleges forming the research population. This was 40% of the total number of institutions. The five institutions were selected on the basis of being accessible easily to the researcher. From each institution a sample of 10 teachers were chosen at randomly. The students were clustered into First and Second years from which a sample of 10 students was chosen at randomly from each cluster.
Table 3-2:The Sample percentages for Teaches
S.NO
COLLEGE
TOT TEACHERS SAMPLE SAMPLE %
1 THOGOTO
67
10
15
2 MACHAKOS
81
10
12
3 KILIMAMBOGO
78
10
13
4 KAMWENJA
0
0
0
5 MURANGA
67
10
15
6 KAIMOSI
69
10
14
7 NAROK
0
0
0
8 BONDO
53
10
19
TOTAL
415
60
14
Table 3-3:The Sample percentages for Students
S.NO
COLLEGE
STUDENTS
1 THOGOTO
2 MACHAKOS
3 KILIMAMBOGO
4 KAMWENJA
5 MURANGA
6 NAROK
7 BONDO
8 KAIMOSI
TOTAL
SAMPLE SAMPLE %
650
20
3
949
20
2
1050
20
2
0
0
0
708
20
3
0
0
0
700
20
3
1100
20
2
5157
120
2
21
3.4
Data Collection Methods
The two major approaches of data collection – qualitative and quantitative methods were used.
On the side of quantitative, primary and secondary data sources were used. secondary and primary data sources were used in this study. The secondary sources were used to collect data that already exist about public PTTCs in Kenya and their status in ICT use. Since these PTTCs are government institutions, a lot of their operations are based on policies set by the government through the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MOEST). Another source of valuable information on education is the United Nations Education, Social, and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO).
Figure 3-3:Data Collection Methods
22
3.4.1
Questionnaires
Questionnaires were chosen as the best instrument for this study because of a number of reasons:
•
The public PTTCs are spread all over the country and therefore it was practically impossible to interview the target respondents – teachers and students.
•
It gives respondents anonymity, students and teachers would fill them truthfully thus improving reliability of the results.
•
Its is an economical and convenient way of collecting data especially where there are time constraints.
Different questionnaires were used for both the teachers and students. While the majority of questions were different, a number of questions were similar for validity and reliability reasons.
The questionnaires consisted of both open ended and closed-ended questions.
Table 3-4:Teachers’ Questionnaire breakdown
Parts
No. of Questions
Personal Details
3
Professional Details
3
ICT Use
7
Focus of ICT use
7
Competencies for Evaluation
4
TOTAL
24
Table 3-5:Students’ Questionnaire breakdown
Parts
No. of Questions
Personal Details
2
ICT Use
8
Focus of ICT use
7
Competencies for Evaluation
5
TOTAL
22
23
3.4.2
Interviews
Qualitative method was used in the form of both Focus Group Discussions (FGD) and In depth
Interviews (IDI). The Focus Group Discussions were conducted with groups of 6 students in three colleges. The students were picked on the basis of those who were available on the day of the interview. These were mainly first year students as second year students were busy with their final national examinations.
The In depth interviews were mainly conducted with the ICT teachers. In some cases where teachers of other subjects were available and willing to give an interview, they were included in the interview schedule. Again it was difficult to schedule interviews with teachers as a majority of them were involved in the administration of national examinations.
Table 3-6:Teachers and Students Interviewed.
College
In Depth Interviews
Machakos
Focus Group Discussion
ICT teacher
Dean of Curriculum
6 students
H.O.D Creative Arts
Muranga
ICT teacher
B/Studies Teacher
Thogoto
6 students
ICT teacher
Non
Mathematics Teacher
3.4.3
Secondary Sources
A good number of secondary sources were consulted during the data collection process. Many international bodies that deal with education produce periodical reports on the status of various aspects of education. Such bodies include but are not limited to the United Nations Education,
Social and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), InfoDev which is a publication of World Bank and
New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD).
The government of Kenya through the Ministry of Education has also released several policy papers on education and more recently on the role of ICT in education. The particular policy papers that were consulted in this study are summarized in the Table 3-7.
24
Table 3-7:The Secondary Sources of Data
Document
Source
1
Ministry
National ICT policy
of
Information
and
Communication, 2006.
2
National Information and Communication Ministry of Education, June, 2006
Technology (ICT) Strategy for Education and
Training
3
ICTs in Education Options Paper
Ministry
of
Education,
Science
and
Technology, 2005
4
E-readiness Survey of Higher Education Kenya
Institutions in Kenya – ICT brief 2007.
5
Monitoring and
Evaluation
of
ICT
Education
Network
(KENET),
August, 2007.
in Information for Development (infoDev) –
Education Projects.
The International Bank of Reconstruction and Development
(World
Bank),
November, 2005
6
Survey of ICT and Education in Africa: Information for Development (infoDev) –
Kenya Country Report.
The International Bank of Reconstruction and Development (World Bank), April,
2007.
7
Information
Technologies
and in Teacher
Communication United Nations Education, Scientific, and
Education:
A Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 2002.
Planning Guide.
25
3.5
Analysis and Presentation
The first research question of this study is concerned with determining the levels of computer use using the CPF. The study takes the amount of computer use and then identifies the focus of the use. This information and others are then used to develop an evaluation framework for Primary
Teacher Education (PTE). The amount of computer use is determined by calculating the total amount of time computers are in use in relation to the 8 hours a day of learning and teaching on weekdays. Figure 3-4:The Fraction of Time Computers are in Use compared to Total learning time
The next part of the analysis looks at the focus of the computer use. It determines the fraction of computer use dedicated to learning ICT itself (IT), learning about other subjects other than computers (Learning Tool) and what fraction of use that serve other purposes other than IT and
Learning Tool e.g. prestige.
26
Figure 3-5: The Focus of Computer use
The last part of the CPF analyses the mode of the Learning Tool aspect of the focus. It determines the levels at which the computers are used to support, extend or transform learning.
Figure 3-6:The Mode of Computer use as a Learning Tool
27
The quantity of computer use was given by respondents through answering an open ended question. Likert scale questions were analyzed to arrive at the focus and mode segments of computer use in the various institutions studied. In cases where a teacher or student indicated that he/she had no computers available for use but filled in subsequent sections concerned with focus and mode, the answers were nullified. This is because there must be “computer use” for the Focus and Mode dimensions to be valid. The comparisons between different foci or mode of computer use are presented in the form of tables and bar graphs.
28
CHAPTER 4
4. RESEARCH FINDINGS, PRESENTATION, AND ANALYSIS
4.1
Quantity of Computer Use
In establishing the quantity of computer use, teachers were asked to indicate the number of hours in which they have access to computers in a week. The following assumptions were made:
•
Access to computers implies having a computer available for use regardless of the purpose of use.
•
The computers could only be available for 8 hours a day for 5 days in a week – time during which teaching and learning takes place, resulting into a total of 40 hours per week. •
Quantity of computer use restricted to use within the institution. Any access to computers outside the institution is not factored in.
4.1.1
Quantity of Computer Use by Teachers
A total number of 40 teachers out of the 45 who returned their filled questionnaires responded by indicating the number of hours they use computers at their various institutions. The table below gives a summary of the response numbers. 5 teachers did not respond to the question.
Table 4-1: Quantity of Computer Use by Teachers.
COLLEGE CODE
SAMPLED
RESPONSE
200
8
8
201
6
6
202
7
7
204
9
8
205
5
5
206
10
6
TOTAL
45
40
Total Number of Hours Computers were Available= 40 x 8 x 5
=1600hrs/week
29
Table 4-2:Summary of the Quantity of Computer Use by Teachers
Hours/Week
Percentage
IN USE
346
21.63
NOT IN USE
1254
78.38
TOTAL
1600
100
The analysis of the data collected indicated that computer use by teachers was 22 % of the total time computers were available for use as represented by Figure 4.1 below.
QUANTITY OF COMPUTER USE BY TEACHERS
IN USE
1
NOT IN USE
IN USE, 22
0
10
NOT IN USE, 78
20
30
40
50
60
70
PERCENTAGE USE
Figure 4-1:The Total Quantity of Computer Use by teachers in PTTCs
30
80
90
100
110
Comparison of Computer Use among the sampled PTTCs
Table 4-3:Comparison of Quantity of Computer Use by teachers in the sampled PTTCs
College
Hrs/Week
% IN USE
Total
USE
Hrs/Week
Code
% NOT IN No.
Teachers
C202
88
280
31
69
7
C200
87
320
27
73
8
C201
82
240
34
66
6
C204
19
320
6
94
8
C205
64
200
32
68
5
C206
6
240
3
78
6
TOTALS
346
1600
22
78
40
31
Of
COMPARISON OF COMPUTER USE AMONG SAMPLED COLLEGES
IN USE
NOT IN USE
100%
90%
80%
% IN U S E /N O T IN U S E
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
C202
C200
C201
C204
C205
C206
COLLEGES
Figure 4-2:Comparison of Quantity of Computer Use by teachers in the sampled PTTCs
32
4.1.2
Quantity of Computer Use by Students
The analysis of the data collected indicated that computer use by students was a low 6 % of the total time computers were available for use as represented by Figure 4.3 below.
Table 4-4:Summary of Quantity of Computer Use by Students
Hours
% hours
IN USE
232
6
NOT IN USE
3888
94
COMPUTER USE BY STUDENTS IN THE SAMPLED COLLEGES
IN USE
1 IN USE, 6
0%
NOT IN USE
NOT IN USE, 94
20%
40%
60%
Figure 4-3:Quantity of Computer Use by students in the sampled PTTCs
33
80%
100%
Table 4-5:Comparison of Quantity of Computer Use by Students in the sampled PTTCs
College
% IN USE
Total
Hrs/Week
USE
Hrs/Week
Code
% NOT IN No.
Students
C202
35
640
5
95
16
C200
47
800
6
94
20
C201
48
800
6
94
20
C204
26
560
5
95
14
C205
40
720
6
94
18
C206
36
600
6
94
15
TOTALS
232
4120
6
94
103
COMPARISION OF QUANTITY OF COMPUTER USE BY STUDENTS IN SAMPLED COLLEGES
IN USE
NOT IN USE
100%
90%
80%
% QUANTITY
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
C202
C200
C201
C204
C205
C206
COLLEGES
Figure 4-4:Comparison of Quantity of Computer Use by students in the sampled PTTCs
34
Of
4.1.3
Quantity of Computer Use by Teachers and Students Combined
The overall computer use by both the students and teachers were as follows:
Table 4-6:Overall Quantity of Computer Use by both Students and Teachers
STUDENTS
TEACHERS
TOTAL
IN USE %
6
22
14
NOT IN USE %
94
78
86
OVERALL QUANTITY OF COMPUTER USE BY BOTH STUDENTS AND TEACHERS IN THE
SAMPLED COLLEGES
NOT IN USE
IN USE
1
IN USE, 14
0%
10%
NOT IN USE, 86
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Figure 4-5:Overall Quantity of Computer Use by both teachers and students in the sampled PTTCs
35
100%
4.2
Focus of Computer Use
This dimension of the CPF deals with the objectives underlying the computer use. It is divided into three categories. The focus dimension is divided into three different categories as follows:
1. IT – Using computers to help learners develop their IT skills.
2. Learning Tool – Using computers to support aspects of learning other than IT skills.
3. Other – Using computers in ways not covered by IT or Learning Tool.
Data for this section was collected by asking the respondents to grade on a scale of four (0-3) their use of computers for classroom teaching/learning, collaboration, and evaluation. The use was based on an estimate of the frequency of use.
4.2.1
Focus of Computer Use by Teachers
Table 4-7:Focus of Computer Use by teachers in the sampled PTTCs
SCORE/3 Pts
Teaching/Learning
Collaboration
Evaluation
LEARNING/TEACHING
TOOL
IT SKILLS & OTHER
% SCORE
0.57
36.63
0.29
18.38
0.70
44.49
0.52
17.4
2.48
82.6
The amount of use for IT skills & Other was derived from the results of Learning/Teaching tool.
It was assumed that the time in which computers were used but not for Learning and Teaching purposes, it was being used for IT skills & Other. It was noted that just a mere 20% of computer use was focused on Teaching and Learning.
36
FOCUS OF COMPUTER USE BY TEACHERS
LEARNING/TEACHING TOOL
LEARNING/TEACHING TOOL,
1
17.40
0.00
20.00
IT SKILLS & OTHER
IT SKILLS & OTHER, 82.60
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
Figure 4-6:The Focus of Computer Use by teachers in PTTCs
It was noted that there is no significant difference between colleges on the focus of computer as demonstrated by the results from each college.
Table 4-8:Summary of Focus of use by teachers in each of the sampled PTTCs
TEACHING &
ICT SKILLS & OTHERS
COLLEGE
LEARNING
C202
0.66
2.34
C200
0.57
2.43
C201
0.62
2.38
C204
0.46
2.54
C205
0.39
2.61
C206
0.49
2.51
AVERAGE TOTALS
0.53
2.47
% AVERAGE TOTALS
17.72
82.28
37
120.00
FOCUS OF COMPUTER USE BY TEACHERS IN THE SAMPLED COLLEGES
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
ICT SKILLS & OTHERS
TEACHING & LEARNING
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
C202
C200
C201
C204
C205
C206
COLLEGES
Figure 4-7:Summary of Focus of use by teachers in each of the sampled PTTCs
4.2.2
Focus of Computer Use by Students
Table 4-9:Summary of Focus of use by teachers in each of the sampled PTTCs
NO. OF
TEACHING &
ICT SKILLS &
STUDENTS
LEARNING
OTHERS
C202
16
0.3625
0.6375
C200
20
0.35
0.65
C201
20
0.18
0.82
C204
14
0.3786
0.6241
C205
18
0.4056
0.5944
C206
15
0.3625
0.6375
AVERAGE TOTALS
104
0.3398
0.6605
33.46
66.54
COLLEGE
%
AVERAGE 100
TOTALS
38
FOCUS OF COMPUTER USE BY STUDENTS
IT & OTHER
LEARNING TOOL
1
0.00
LEARNING TOOL, 33.46
20.00
IT & OTHER, 66.54
40.00
60.00
80.00
Figure 4-8:Focus of Computer Use by students in the sampled PTTCs
39
100.00
120.00
FOCUS OF USE BY EACH COLLEGE
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
ICT & OTHER SKILLS
LEARNING TOOL
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
C202
C200
C201
C204
C205
C206
COLLEGES
Figure 4-9:Comparison of Focus of Computer Use by students in the sampled PTTCs
4.2.3
Focus of Computer Use by Teachers and Students Combined
Table 4-10:Focus of Computer Use by Teachers and Students the sampled PTTCs
TEACHERS
AVG. TOTAL
& 33.46
17.4
25.43
& 66.54
82.6
74.57
STUDENTS
TEACHING
LEARNING %
ICT
SKILLS
OTHERS %
40
FOCUS OF COMPUTER USE BY STUDENTS AND TEACHERS COMBINED
LEARNING TOOL
1
LEARNING TOOL, 25.43
0
20
IT & OTHER
IT & OTHER, 74.57
40
60
80
100
Figure 4-10:Overall Focus of Computer Use by both teachers and students in the sampled PTTCs
41
120
4.3
The Mode Dimension
The mode dimension of the CPF is concerned with the impact that computer use has on the curriculum but excluding the IT curriculum. This includes both the content and the processes of the curriculum. The mode dimension is subdivided into three categories:
1. Support – Automating various aspects of the curriculum without changing the processes.
2. Extend – Using computers to enrich learning across the curriculum.
3. Transform – Using computers to fundamentally change the teaching and learning processes. This dimension was not measured directly due to the following complexities:
1. It was practically impossible for teachers to classify the mode of use since use of computers was not planned.
2. Teachers were not conversant with what comprises Support, Extension, or
Transformation of teaching and learning focus of computer use.
The results for this dimension were therefore derived on the basis of the following:
1. Judging by how computers were used for teaching and learning – as shown by figure 4.5 below, mainly for automation of results calculation, the study concluded that the mode is still at the support level.
Table 4-11:Use of Computers as a Teaching and Learning tool by teachers in each of the sampled PTTCs
COLLEGE CLASSROOM COLLABORATION EVALUATION
AV.
TEACHING
TOTAL
&
TEACHING
LEARNING
&
LEARNING
C202
0.64
0.33
1.00
0.66
C200
0.56
0.46
0.69
0.57
C201
0.33
0.33
1.20
0.62
C204
0.69
0.19
0.50
0.46
C205
0.50
0.27
0.40
0.39
C206
0.59
0.22
0.67
0.49
AV TOT
0.55
0.30
0.74
0.53
% AV TOT
18.42
9.99
24.75
17.72
42
USE OF ICT FOR TEACHING & LEARNING BY COLLEGE
COLLABORATION
CLASSROOM TEACHING & LEARNING
EVALUATION
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
C202
C200
C201
C204
C205
COLLEGES
Figure 4-11:Use of ICT in teaching and learning in each of the sampled PTTCs
43
C206
USE OF ICT AS A TEACHING & LEARNING TOOL
CLASSROOM TEACHING & LEARNING
% AV TOT
0.00
34.66
COLLABORATION
18.80
20.00
40.00
EVALUATION
46.54
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
% AV TOT
EVALUATION
46.54
COLLABORATION
18.80
CLASSROOM TEACHING & LEARNING
34.66
Figure 4-12:Use of ICT as a teaching and Learning tool in the sampled PTTCs
2. The conclusion in (1) above was further supported by the fact that the expertise levels of teachers in IT skills is still very low – being just able to perform basic computer operations and word processing applications. The assumption is that for a teacher to be able to use computers to extend, or transform learning, (s)he must have very good or excellent IT skills.
44
Table 4-12:Summary of Teachers general level of expertise in the sampled PTTCs
Expertise
Description
Level Number
Percentage
NON
-Can not use computers at
L1
3
7
L2
30
68
L3
4
9
L4
6
14
L5
1
2
44
100
all
FAIR
-Basic computer operations and word processing
GOOD
-Able to use all office applications for school related work.
VERY GOOD
-All the above skills plus use of Internet and its resources. EXCELLENT
-All the above plus use of email, Internet surfing and searching, development of web pages, participation in e-learning. TOTAL
45
TEACHERS ' LEVELS OF EXPERTISE IN THE SAMPLED COLLEGES
80
LEVEL OF EXPERTISE
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
LEVELS
Figure 4-13:Summary of Teachers general level of expertise in ICT in the sampled PTTCs
46
Table 4-13:Summary of Students general level of expertise in the sampled PTTCs
Expertise
Description
Level Number
Percentage
NON
-Can not use computers at
L1
5
5
L2
55
54
L3
33
33
L4
7
7
L5
1
1
101
100
all
FAIR
-Basic computer operations and word processing
GOOD
-Able to use all office applications for school related work.
VERY GOOD
-All the above skills plus use of Internet and its resources. EXCELLENT
-All the above plus use of email, Internet surfing and searching, development of web pages, participation in e-learning. TOTAL
47
STUDENTS ' LEVELS OF EXPERTISE IN THE SAMPLED COLLEGES
60
LEVEL OF EXPERTISE
50
40
30
20
10
0
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
LEVELS
Figure 4-14:Summary of Students general level of expertise in ICT in the sampled PTTCs
48
Table 4-14:Summary of general level of expertise for both students and Teachers in the sampled
PTTCs
Expertise
Description
Average
Level % Number
Teachers Students Percentage
NON
-Can not use
L1
7
5
6
L2
68
54
61
L3
9
33
21
L4
14
7
10
L5
2
1
2
100
100
100
computers at all
FAIR
-Basic computer operations and word processing GOOD
-Able to use all office applications for school related work.
VERY GOOD
-All the above skills plus use of Internet and its resources.
EXCELLENT
-All the above plus use of e-mail, Internet surfing and searching, development of web pages, participation in e-learning. TOTAL
49
AVERAGE LEVELS OF EXPERTISE OF BOTH TEACHERS AND STUDENTS COMBINED
70
LEVEL OF EXPERTISE
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
LEVELS
Figure 4-15:Average levels of expertise of both teachers and students in ICT in the sampled PTTCs
50
4.4
Summary of Results
Figure 4-16:Summary of the evaluation results using CPF
51
4.5
Inference
It is a well known fact that computer laboratories in educational institutions in Africa are underutilized (Unwin, 2004).The overall quantity of computer use by both teachers and students in the sampled schools stand at 14%. It is indicative to note that 5 out of 6 teachers who had access time of more than 10 hours a week (about 83% quantity of use) have computers in their offices. Since most institutions have just one computer lab for both teachers and students, most teachers find it difficult to access computers due to two main reasons. First, many teachers may be uncomfortably using computers side by side with students. Secondly, most of the times, computers are scheduled for students use but not teachers. Other indirect causes of low quantity of computer use were cited as:
1. Scarcity of time for both students and teachers
2. Inadequate computers.
3. Lack of basic ICT skills
4. Lack of appropriate software
5. Lack of Internet facilities
6. Some teachers indicated lack of technical support as contributing.
The PTTCs have an average of 69 teachers and 859 students each with an average of 45 computers. This gives a ration of 1:14( One computer to 14 people). A respondent (Respondent1) from college C201 said that teachers who do not have computers in their offices hardly use computers and have a tendency of giving out their work to be done by computer teachers.
Respondent3 in the same college said that teachers are mostly occupied with teaching and therefore have less time to use computers.
Recommendations
1. Increasing the quantity of computer hardware.
2. Provision of portable computers to reduce physical constraints.
3. Computers could be used in the evenings and at night by addressing the issues of security and staffing.
4. Kenya Institute of Education needs to develop local digital curriculum content.
5. Need for ICT champions in every PTTC
6. In-Service of all PTTC college tutors in basic ICT skills.
7. On-going specialized training on ICT integration in every subject offered at the PTTC
52
CHAPTER 5
5. RECOMMENDED FRAMEWORK
5.1
General Framework for ICT Monitoring and Evaluation in Education
Figure 5-1:Conceptual Framework for ICT Monitoring and Evaluation (InfoDev, 2005)
This general conceptual framework takes into account all the broad development concerns including context-sensitive issues related to ICT use for educational development. The use of
ICTs and ICT impact should be considered within this broad development context. Once this context is established, and the role of ICT is identified, then a plan for evaluation can be designed. While the framework identifies all the ICT interventions that need to be evaluated, this study is concerned with the teacher training component. The teacher training component can has been divided into four key areas:
1. Equipment operation
2. Software use
3. Instruction
4. Interaction
53
These key components informed the development of the proposed framework. In the proposed framework, new terminologies proper to teacher education as a discipline have been used to express the above mentioned components. In the proposed framework, the terminologies have been used as shown in the table below
Table 5-1:Comparison of terminologies used in the general framework for evaluating ICT in education and the Proposed framework for evaluating ICT in teacher education.
General Framework for ICT Monitoring Proposed
Framework
for
and Evaluation in Education.
Evaluation in Teacher Education
Equipment operation
ICT
ICT Usage Skills
Software use
Instruction
Content and Pedagogy
Interaction
Collaboration and Networking
The proposed framework incorporates the social and health issues component to take of the increased need for teachers to address the challenges posed by adoption of technology in the society, locally and globally.
5.2
ICT in Teacher Education
According to UNESCO (2002), ICT in teacher education can be organized around four competencies as follows:
1. Content and Pedagogy – Focused on teachers’ instructional practices and knowledge of the curriculum.
2. Collaboration and networking – Acknowledges communicative potential of ICTs to extend learning beyond the classroom.
3. Technical issues – Teachers update their skills with software and hardware as new generations of technology emerge.
4. Social/Emerging Issues – Competence to acknowledge that technology brings with it new rights and responsibilities.
54
5.3
The Proposed Framework
Figure 5-2:The Proposed Framework
55
5.3.1 The Proposed Competencies
Research done with teachers on the effectiveness of the CPF indicated that it was reliable for measuring quantity of computer use but the focus and mode dimensions were not reliable when applied to secondary descriptions of computer use (Twining,
2002). Several respondents commented that the difficulties encountered were due to lack of clear and detailed indicators. This lack of clear indicators on which to measure the focus and mode dimensions made the research to measure those dimensions indirectly as explained in section 4.2 and 4.3. The new framework proposed some competencies on which indicators could be based. The teachers were asked through the questionnaire to rate them on a Likert scale consisting of Very necessary,
Necessary, and Not Necessary. The following results were got from 21 teachers who answered the question.
Table 5-2:Ranking of the proposed competencies and indicators by teachers.
Code
Number of Teachers
Very Necessary
3
11
Necessary
2
6
Not Necessary
1
4
TOTALS
21
The responses showed that 52% of the teachers considered the competencies and indicators proposed in the new framework were Very necessary, 29% as Necessary while 19% considered them Not necessary as shown by figure 5-3 below.
56
AVERAGE RESPONSE TO PROPOSED INDICATORS
19%
Very Necessary
Necessary
Not Necessary
52%
29%
Figure 5-3:Average response to the proposed competencies and indicators for the proposed evaluation framework.
5.3.2 Development Context
Best practices in ICT integration into education points to the guiding principles recommended by international bodies. These best practices and guidelines can be adapted to meet the specific needs of every country. Bodies like UNESCO (2002), InfoDev (2005) and the
Society for Information and Teacher Education SITE (2002) have recommended some guidelines to be followed when implementing ICT in teacher education. Summed up, indicators of good ICT uses in teacher education that are set up at the national level include:
1. ICT policy through which the government articulates her levels of support and commitment towards ICT implementation at institutional levels.
2. ICT infrastructure which enables connectivity to the Internet.
3. ICT curriculum to guide the application of ICT in education.
These factors have a direct and indirect effect on computer use at the institutional levels.
5.3.3 Computer Use
This defines the quantity of computer use as a proportion of the available learning time.
Twinning (2002) provides a complete definition of the quantity of computer use as follows:
1. The dimension is concerned with the proportion of the school day during which one or more computers are in use by students or teachers.
57
2. The school day is taken to mean the time when students are in school and includes play times, lunch times, but not after-school clubs.
3. The number of students using a computer is irrelevant.
4. The number of computers in use is irrelevant.
In this new framework, the learning time includes all the eight hours students are in school.
Given a tight schedule for lessons in PTTCs, students only make heavy use of computers during the breaks within the learning time.
5.3.4 Focus of Use
The focus of use explores what the computers are used for. The dimension deals with the objectives underlying the computer use (Twining, 2002). This dimension is subdivided into four parts in the proposed framework.
1. IT Skills – Using computers to help students acquire computer skills. This is mainly restricted to the understanding of computer hardware and software.
2. Learning Tool – Students using computers to support any aspect of their learning other than IT itself. Students applying IT in classroom activities and assignments
(Auerswald & Magambo, n.d)
3. Teaching Tool – Focus is on how teachers use computers to create better teaching and learning environments.
4. Other – The use of computers for other purposes that excludes IT skills, teaching, and learning. This includes objectives that do not relate directly to learning and teaching outcomes. 5.3.5
ICT in Teacher Education Competencies
This section of the framework identifies categories of competencies that teachers and students should have in order to use ICT effectively. These competencies are in line with the SITE
(2002) basic principles for development of effective ICT teacher education. These are:
1. Technology should be infused into the entire teacher education program. Students should learn about and with technology and how to incorporate it into their own teaching. 2. Technology should be introduced in context. Pre-service students should learn many uses of technology because they are integrated into their coursework and field experiences. Teacher educators, content specialists, and mentor teachers should expose the pre-service teachers to regular and pervasive modeling of technology and provide opportunities for them to teach with technology.
3. Students should experience innovative technology-supported learning environments in their teacher education programs.
58
This section uses information from the following document
1. Information and Communication Technologies in Teacher Education : A planning guide (2002)
2. Department of Education and Science in England (1989)
3. Teacher Training Agency (2001)
4. Primary Teacher Education Syllabus (K.I.E)
5.3.4.1 ICT Usage Skills
The term ICT Usage Skills is used here more broadly to include not only learning about computer software and hardware but also their application.
In the proposed framework, ICT usage skills support all the areas of technology use in teacher education. This approach is taken because technology should pervade the entire teacher education programme (SITE, 2000). Indicators for evaluation in ICT usage skills can be developed around the following two areas.
1. Demonstration of introductory knowledge, skills and understanding of concepts related to technology.
2. Demonstration of continual growth in technology, knowledge and skills to stay abreast of current and emerging technologies.
5.3.4.2 Content and Pedagogy
Content and Pedagogy can further be divided into three areas mainly to ease the development of indicators.
a) Planning and Designing Learning environments
Teachers should be able to plan and design learning platforms that are supported by technology that include:
1. Design appropriate learning opportunities that apply technology to support diverse needs of learners.
2. Apply current research on teaching and learning with technology when planning learning environments.
3. Identify and locate technology resources and evaluate their potential value in classroom use and sustainability.
4. Plan for the management of the technology resources within the context of learning.
5. Plan strategies to manage student learning in technology enhanced context.
59
b) Teaching, Learning, and the curriculum.
Indicators in this area can be clustered around the following areas:
1. Use technology to support learner centred strategies that address diverse needs of students. 2. Apply technology to develop students’ higher order skills and creativity.
3. Manage student learning activities in a technology enhanced environment.
c) Assessment and Evaluation
This involves evaluating a teacher’s competence in applying technology to a variety of effective assessment and evaluation.
1. Application of technology in assessing student learning of a subject using a variety of assessment strategies.
2. Using technology resources to collect data, interpret results, and communicate findings to improve instructional practice.
3. Determine students’ appropriate use of technology resources for learning, communication and productivity.
4. Evaluate the ways in which use of ICTs changes the nature of teaching and learning.
5.3.4.3 Collaboration and Networking
Teachers use technology to enhance their productivity and professional practice.
1. Use of technology to engage in on-going professional development and lifelong learning. 2. Using technology to share best practice and reduce bureaucracy.
3. Use technology to collaborate with peers, parents and the larger community in order to nurture student learning.
5.3.4.4 Social and Emerging Issues
Teachers should understand the social, ethical, legal and human issues surrounding the use of
Information and Communication Technologies in schools and apply that understanding in practice. 1. Model and teach legal and ethical practice related to technology use.
2. Apply technology resources to enable and empower learners with diverse backgrounds, characteristics and abilities.
3. Promotion of safe and healthy use of technology resources.
4. Facilitate equitable access to technology resources for all students and teachers.
60
5.3.6 Mode of Computer Use
The mode component of the proposed framework is concerned with the impact that computer use has on the curriculum. The curriculum includes:
1. The content (including but going beyond the explicit curriculum but then also excludes the ICT curriculum)
2. The processes involved in the delivery of the curriculum.
The mode of computer use is divided into three categories: Support, Extend and Transform.
Table 5-3 summarizes the key distinctions between the three modes.
61
Table 5-3: Breakdown of the Mode dimension of Computer Use
Curriculum
Content
(Learning
Mode
Process
(How
Objectives excludes and
but
teaching learning is Summary
conducted)
ICT
objectives)
Same
and
Automated
but More efficient
otherwise essentially without
unchanged.
Support
or
effective
changing content Different but does And/or
Different but does Changes
not
not
require
a
require
computer.
computer.
a content and/or process could
but have been achieved
Extend
in a classroom without a
computer.
Different requires and And/or a Different requires computer.
computer
and Changes a content and/or process and
could not have been achieved
Transform
in a classroom without computer.
62
a
Suggested indicators for the various categories of the mode dimension are summarized in
Table 5-4.
Table 5-4: Suggested Indicators of each aspect of Mode of Computer Use
Mode
Support
Indicator area
1. Using computers to support learning/teaching in other subject areas – Infusion (Anderson and Collins in (Harris, 1999))
2. Using computers to achieve traditional pedagogical goals.(Scott et al, 1992 in (Harris, 1999))
3. Usage of Drill and Skill software (Clement et al, 1993 in
(Harris,1999))
Extend
1. Use of problem solving software and tools to extend and enrich learning (Clement et al, 1993 in (Harris,1999))
2. Promotion of learning/teaching communities - and seeing computers as 'mind-tools ' that can make this possible (Cuban
1993).
3. Does it unlock new attitudes and behaviours, hopefully to be transferred to other learning situations (Hexel et al. 1998)?
Transform
1. Does technology transform knowledge itself (Clock, 2000)
2. Use of Hypermedia/Multimedia to alter what teachers and students can present and how we can represent it (Twining 2001).
3. Is technology "Transforming teaching and learning into an engaging and active process connected to real life" (Cuban 2001
p.14)?
63
CHAPTER 6
6. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
6.1
Introduction
There are a number of evaluation models that can be used in the field of education. These models are aimed at presenting a starting point from which those charged with evaluation activities can proceed. Each of the models lays down general procedural principles and focuses attention on certain unique functions of the model of evaluation. The three dominant modules are:
1. Achievement of desired outcomes: This model calls attention to the following facets of evaluation:
-Examination of goal attainment
-Consideration of the relationship between student achievement and educational objectives -Examination of the relationship between the objectives and the learning experiences. -Examination of the relationship between the actual learning experiences and educational outcomes.
-Determination of the significance of the educational objectives and the adequacy of these objectives for any specific group of learners.
2. Merits of an Entity: This approach stresses the need for determining the merits of a given entity as being central to a curriculum evaluation. The worth of a process is evaluated from:
-Relative efficiency of a process or entity
-Relative cost of the use of an approach or process.
3. The Decision-Oriented Approach: In this approach, an evaluation is worthwhile only if its results affect future action. It is therefore action oriented. It involves a three stage process covering:
-Data collection
-Data Analysis
-Preparation of summary reports
This implementation plan is going to adopt a Three- Phase Decision Oriented Evaluation scheme. 64
6.2
A Three – Phase Implementation Scheme
Figure 6-1:The Implementation Plan
65
CHAPTER 7
7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The study discovered that the quantity of computer use in PTTCs is 14% and it is mainly focused on the learning of ICT skills which takes 75 % of the time computers are used. The study concludes that the reality-rhetoric gap of the impact of ICTs in PTTCS is very big and needs to be bridged. The study recommends that the impact of ICT in PTTCs be evaluated from time to time to ensure that programme objectives are met. There is an urgent need to conduct intensive in-training to all the teachers in the colleges. The curriculum developers should develop local content and make it available to all the training colleges. Several factors have been cited as responsible for low quantity of computer use in colleges. Some of these factors are: attitude towards new technologies, poor management, lack of local content, and shortage of equipment. A lot of research can still be done to establish to which extent these factors affect effective integration of ICTs in teacher education.
66
8. REFERENCES
Alavi, M. & Leidner, D. E 2001, ‘Research Commentary: Technology-mediated learning—A call for greater depth and breadth of research’ Information Systems
Research Vol. 12, no. 1, pp.1-10.
Allan H.K. Yuen, Nancy Law and K.C. Wong 2003, ‘ICT implementation and school leadership: Case studies of ICT integration in teaching and learning’ Journal of
Educational Administration Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 158-170
Auerswald & Magambo, Fostering ICT use in Africa, viewed 27 May 2006, http://www.developmentgateway.org/elearning/highlights/viewHighlight.do~activeHighli ghtId=109021
Bloom, BS 1970, ‘Toward a theory of testing which includes measurement -evaluation – assessment’ in Wittrock, M. C. and Wiley, D. E. (eds), ‘The Evaluation of Instruction’, pp. 25-50. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston in J.C Clift, B.w. Imri. 1980, ‘The
Design of Evaluation for Learning’ Higher Education, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 69-80.
Bullock, C., & Ory, J 2000, ‘Evaluating instructional technology implementation in a higher education environment’ American Journal of Evaluation, Vol.21, No.3, pp.315328.
Cousins, JB., & Earl, L 1992, ‘The case for participatory evaluation’ Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol.4, pp.397-418.
Cloke, C 2000, Planning to use ICT, factors which influence teachers, ESRC ICT &
Pedagogy.
Cuban, L 1993, ‘Computers meet classroom: Classroom wins’ Teachers College Record
Vol.95, No.2, p.185.
Cuban, L 2001, Oversold and Underused: Computers in the Classroom, London: Harvard
University Press.
Draper, S., Brown, M., Henderson, F., & McAteer, E 1996, ‘Integrative evaluation: An emerging role for classroom studies of CAL’, Computers and Education, Vol.26, pp.1-3.
Department of Education and Science in England 1982, Criteria for accreditation course of teacher training, Circular 24/89 DES, London.
67
Ehrmann, SC 1995, What does research tell us about technology and higher learning?
Change, Vol.27, No.2, pp.20-27. viewed 15 October 2003 http://www.learner.org/edtech/rscheval/rightquestion.html Haddad, W.,& Draxler , A (Eds.) 2002), Technologies for education: Potentials,
Parameters, and Prospects, Paris:,Unesco.
Heinecke, W.F., Blasi, L., Milman, N., & Washington, L 1999, New directions in the evaluation of the effectiveness of educational psychology. The secretary’s conference onchnology. Viewed 15 October 2003 http://www.ed.gov/Technology/TechConf/1999/whitepapers.paper8.html[nd] Harris, S 1999, INSET for IT: a review of the literature relating to preparation for and use of IT in schools, Slough: National Foundation for Educational Research.
Hexel, D., De Marcellus, O. and Bernoulli, M 1998, ‘Potentials and constraints of ICT in schools’, Educational Media International Vol.35, No.3, pp.149-156.
Jackson, GA 1990, ‘Evaluating learning technology: Methods, strategies, and examples in higher education’, Journal of Higher Education, Vol.61, No.3, pp.294-311.
KIC, 2006, Kenya Gazette March, 2006, ‘Information and Communications
Technology Guidelines (ICT Policy), Gazette Notice No. 2431’ in ICT strategy brief based on findings of e-readiness survey of higher education institutions in Kenya, 2007.
Kozma,R.B Kozma. 2005, ‘National policies that connect ICT-based Education reform to economic and social development’, Human Technology, Vol. 1, No 2, pp.117-156
Lemke, C. & Coughlin, EC 1998, Technology in American Schools: Seven dimensions for gauging progress- A policy maker’s guide, Santa Monica, CA, Milken Exchange on
Education Technology.
Meoli K. & Waema T, ICT strategy brief based on findings of e-readiness survey of higher education institutions in Kenya, Kenya Education Network, 2007
Ministry of Education 2006, National Information and Communication Technology(ICT) strategy for Education and Training, Government Printer, Nairobi.
68
Ministry of Education, Science and Technology 2005, Sessional Paper No 5 of 2004 on a policy framework for education, training, and research, Government Printer, Nairobi.
Ministry Of Education, Science and Technology 2005, Kenya Education Sector Support
Programme: 2005-2010: Delivering Quality Equitable Education and Training to All
Kenyans, 9 May 2005 Draft.
Owston, RD 1999, Strategies for evaluating Web-based learning. Invited address given to the SIG/Text, Technology, and Learning Strategies at the annual meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, Montreal, April 1999.
Owston, RD. 2000, A meta-evaluation of six case studies of Web-based learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New
Orleans, 2000.
Stake, RE 1978, Program evaluation, particularly responsive. Kalamazoo: Western
Michigan University.
Scriven, M 1967, Methodology of evaluation in R. Tyler, R. Gagn, & M. Scriven (Eds.),
Perspectives of curriculume valuation, Chicago, Rand McNally, pp. 39-83
Teacher Training Agency 2001, The use of ICT in subject teaching – Expected outcomes of the New opportunities Fund ICT training initiative for teachers in England, Wales and
Nothern Ireland. Teacher Training Agency: London, viewed 15 February 2002. http://www.webct.com Twining P 2002, Conceptualizing Computer Use in Education: introducing the Computer
Use Framework, British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 28, No.
Twining, P 2001, E211 Learning Matters: Challenges of the Information Age - Software
Guide, Milton Keynes: The Open University.
United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization [UNESCO] 2002, Open and Distance Learning: Trends, policy, and strategy considerations,Paris, Unesco.
United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) 2000, The
Dakar framework for action, Viewed October 2005 http://www.unesco.org/education/efa/ed_for_all/dakfram_eng.shtml 69
Unwin, T 2004, ‘Towards a framework for the use of ICT in Teacher Training in Africa’,
The Journal of Open and Distance Education, Special Issue on Open Learning in Less
Developed Countries, pg.8
Windschitl, M 1998, ‘The WWW and classroom research: What path should we take?’
Educational Researcher, Vol.27, No.1, pp.28-33.
World Bank 2004, Monitoring and Evaluation: Some tools, methods, and approaches.
Washington, D.C. World Bank Group. http://www.worldbank.org/oed/ecd[n.d]
Young, JW 2002), Evaluating the impact of technology in college courses. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New
Orleans, 2002.
70
9. APPENDICES
9.1
Request Letter to Students
John Otieno Oredo,
Strathmore School,
P.o Box 25095,
Nairobi.
00603. joredo@strathmore.ac.ke ___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
Dear Sir/Madam,
Re: Research Questionnaire
I am a Masters of Information Technology student at Strathmore University specializing in Information Systems Management. Professionally, I am a teacher of
Computer Studies and Mathematics at Strathmore School. My research project is
‘Using CPF to Evaluate the Impact of ICT Investment in Education’ taking the case of
Primary Teacher Training Colleges.
In order to gather data for the research, I have prepared a questionnaire to be filled by the student teachers. I kindly request your assistance in this academic endeavour by filling in the questionnaire. I assure you that the data collected here will be held in confidentiality. Thanks in advance.
Regards
John Otieno Oredo
71
9.2
Request Letter to Teachers
John Otieno Oredo,
Strathmore School,
P.o Box 25095,
Nairobi.
00603. joredo@strathmore.ac.ke ___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
Dear Sir/Madam,
Re: Research Questionnaire
I am a Masters of Information Technology student at Strathmore University specializing in Information Systems Management. Professionally, I am a teacher of
Computer Studies and Mathematics at Strathmore School. My research project is
‘Using CPF to Evaluate the Impact of ICT Investment in Education’ taking the case of
Primary Teacher Training Colleges.
In order to gather data for the research, I have prepared a questionnaire to be filled by the teacher educators. I kindly request your assistance in this academic endeavour by filling in the questionnaire. I would like to emphasize that your responses are extremely valuable to me and I would greatly appreciate your answering all questions.
I assure you as a professional colleague, that the data collected here will be held in confidence. Thanks in advance.
Regards
John Otieno Oredo
72
9.3
Questionnaire for Teachers
TEACHERS QUESTIONNAIRE
1.
College Code: -------------------------------------
2.
What is your gender?
Female
3.
Male
How old are you?
Under 30 years
30 – 50 years
Over 50 years
4.
What are your qualifications, and please indicate specialization?( Check all that apply)
PhD:
Masters:
Diploma:
Certificate:
5.
Degree:
Others:
How many years have you been in a teaching position or role?
…………………………………………………………………………………………..
6.
What are your teaching subjects?
…………………………………………………………………………………………..
7.
How many years have you been using computers and related technology?
More than 2yrs but less than 6yrs
Less than 2 yrs
More than 6yrs
73
8.
Please indicate whether you have access to computers and Internet in the following locations
ACCESS
COMPUTERS
Yes
TO ACCESS
INTERNET
No
Yes
TO
No
Institution
Home
Nearest town
Others (Specify)
9.
Where do you use computers in your institution? (Tick all that apply)
In my office
Computer lab
Classroom
10.
Staff room
Library
Other (state):
How many hours per week are the computers available to you?
.............................................................................................................................
11.
How many hours per week is the internet available for you in college?
..............................................................................................................................
12.
Did you receive any ICT training before joining the teaching profession?
Yes
13.
No
How would you rate your level of expertise in computer use?
Tick the applies one
that Level of Expertise
NO EXPERTISE- Can not use computers at all.
FAIR – Able to operate basic computer functions and a word processing application.
GOOD – Able to use Office applications (word processors, spreadsheets, presentation software) for school assignments.
VERY GOOD – All the above skills including use of Internet and Internet resources.
EXCELLENT - all of the above including use of e-mail, Internet surfing and searching; development of web pages; participation in elearning and online classes
74
14. How frequently do you use ICTs for your school work related to the following purposes?
Purpose
Very
Often
Often
- Twice or
- everyday
more week Teaching specific subjects
Learning specific subjects/disciplines
(to stay abreast with emerging professional issues)
Teaching computer skills
Finding and materials accessing
educational
Making presentations/lectures
Preparing lessons
Communicating with students
Communicating with teachers/professionals
other
Communicating with parents
Keeping track of student performance
Preparing reports
Other(state)
75
a
Rarely
Few
times each month
Never
15. tool. State the subject(s) in which you have used ICT as a teaching/learning
…………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………
16.
Is the use of ICT in that subject planned for in the schemes of work?
Yes
17.
No
Did you develop the tool/software?
Yes
18.
No
Do you think ICTs can be used for the purposes below?
NO
YES
Motivate/reward students e.g. give extra computer time as a reward to a student.
As a substitute for teaching
Keep students busy while a teacher does something else
To impress Inspectors, students and other stakeholders 19.
Did you receive any training in ICT in the last 3 years
Yes
No
76
NOT
SURE
20.
What would be your main reason for acquiring further ICT skills?
•
Prestige
•
Change profession
•
It is requirement for promotion
•
Use it in enhancing teaching and learning
•
Start ICT oriented business
•
Other
21. The following are some of the proposed ICT related skills that should be emphasized in teacher education. According to you, how would you rank them in order of relevance to primary teacher education?
I
a
b
II
a
b
c
d
3=Very Necessary, 2=Necessary, 1=Not Necessary (tick in 3 the box)
Demonstrate sound understanding of ICT operations and concepts Demonstrate interest in continual growth of technology knowledge so as to stay abreast of current and emerging technologies Design learning strategies that use ICT to support the diverse needs of learners
Apply current research on teaching and learning with ICT when planning learning environments.
Identify and locate technology resources suitable for meeting learning objectives.
Plan student learning in a technology enhanced context
e Management and care of ICT resources
III a Apply ICT to develop students’ creativity
b Manage student learning in a technology enhanced environment c Facilitate technology enhanced experiences that address content standards and student IT standards
IV a Use technology in assessing student learning of subject matter using a variety of assessment techniques. b Use technology resources to collect and analyze data
77
2
1
V
a Use technology resources to engage in on-going professional development and life-long learning b Use technology to collaborate with peer and stakeholders
c Reflect on professional practice to make informed decisions regarding use of technology for teaching/learning
VI a Identify and use technology resources that affirm diversity
b Promote safe and healthy use of technology resources
c Promote equal access of technology resources for all students
d Model and teach legal and ethical practice related to technology use.
22. Apart from the above mentioned skills, state any other skills that you think are useful for ICT in teacher education.
………………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………………..
23.
Information and Communications Technology in teacher education can be clustered around the four competencies given below. Please rank the competencies in terms of the emphasis given to each in the teacher education program. 1=Really Emphasized.
2= Slightly Emphasized.
3= Not Emphasized.
3
2
1
ICT skills and concepts
Use of ICT in planning, learning, teaching, assessment and evaluation.
Collaboration and networking amongst teaching professionals Social, ethical, legal, and human issues in ICT use
24. In which of the above mentioned competencies do you feel inadequate as a teacher educator?
..........................................................................................................................................
THANK YOU FOR COMPLETING THIS QUESTIONNAIRE
78
9.4
Questionnaire for Students
STUDENTS QUESTIONNAIRE
1.
College Code: -------------------------------------
2.
What is your gender?
Female
3.
Male
You are in which year of study?
First
Second
4.
How many years have you been using computers and related technology?
More than 2yrs but less than 6yrs
Less than 2 yrs
More than 6yrs
4.
Where did you first have encounter with computers?
Here in College
High School
Computer training college
5.
How many hours per week are the computers available to you?
Hours
6.
How many hours per week is the internet available for you in college?
Hours
7.
Where do you use computers in your institution? (Tick all that apply)
Computer lab
Library
Other (state):
Classrooms
79
8.
Apart from the college, where else do you have access to computers?
None
Home
Nearby Cybercafe
9.
How many hours on average per week do you use computers outside the college? Hours
10.
How would you rate your level of expertise in computer use?
Tick the applies one
that Level of Expertise
NO EXPERTISE- Can not use computers at all.
FAIR – Able to operate basic computer functions and a word processing application.
GOOD – Able to use Office applications (word processors, Spreadsheets, presentation software) for school assignments.
VERY GOOD – All the above skills including use of Internet and Internet resources.
EXCELLENT - all of the above including use of e-mail, Internet surfing and searching; development of web pages; participation in e-learning and online classes 11.
How would you rate your skills in the following computer areas?
None
Basic
Intermediate
Word processing Spreadsheets
DTPs
Databases
Presentation tools Internet
Basic repairs and maintenance
80
Proficient
12.
Answer the following questions related to using ICT as a learning tool.
Question a Do you use computers to help you learn other school subjects?
b
Do you use computers to work on projects as groups?
d
Do you think you can learn some of the subjects independently with computers?
e
Does using computers to learn change your attitude toward a subject? f
No
Do you use computers to assist you in preparing assignment reports and presentations?
c
Yes
Do you use the Internet to share knowledge with other students/teachers Do you use any computer software to help you learn on your own?
g
h
i
j
13.
Do you use any form of hypermedia to organize/present what you have learnt to your teachers or classmates?
Do you use computers/Internet to explore legal, ethical and human issues in use of technology?
Have you ever used computers/Internet to gather and organize learning materials on emerging issues like HIV/AIDS, drug abuse, environmental degradation, violence against vulnerable groups etc.
If you use computers to learn other subjects, state the subjects.
…………………………………………………………………………………..
14.
Do you learn ICT in other subjects?
Yes
15.
No
If yes, state some of those subjects.
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………..
81
16.
Do you think ICTs can be used for these purposes?
Purpose
NO
YES
NOT
SURE
Motivate/reward students e.g. give extra computer time as a reward to a student.
As a substitute for teaching
Keep students busy while a teacher does something else
To impress Inspectors, students and other stakeholders 17.
What would be your main reason for acquiring further ICT skills?
•
Prestige
•
Change profession
•
It is requirement for promotion
•
Use it in enhancing teaching and learning
•
Start ICT oriented business
•
Other (state):
18. The following are some of the proposed ICT related skills that should be emphasized in teacher education. According to you, how would you rank them in order of relevance to primary teacher education?
I
a
b
II
a
b
c
3=Very Necessary, 2=Necessary, 1=Not Necessary (tick in 3 the box)
Demonstrate sound understanding of ICT operations and concepts Demonstrate interest in continual growth of technology knowledge so as to stay abreast of current and emerging technologies Design learning strategies that use ICT to support the diverse needs of learners
Apply current research on teaching and learning with ICT when planning learning environments.
Identify and locate technology resources suitable for meeting
82
2
1
learning objectives. d Plan student learning in a technology enhanced context
e Management and care of ICT resources
III a Apply ICT to develop students’ creativity
b Manage student learning in a technology enhanced environment c Facilitate technology enhanced experiences that address content standards and student IT standards
IV a Use technology in assessing student learning of subject matter using a variety of assessment techniques. b Use technology resources to collect and analyze data
V
a Use technology resources to engage in on-going professional development and life-long learning b Use technology to collaborate with peer and stakeholders
c Reflect on professional practice to make informed decisions regarding use of technology for teaching/learning
VI a Identify and use technology resources that affirm diversity
b Promote safe and healthy use of technology resources
c Promote equal access of technology resources for all students
d Model and teach legal and ethical practice related to technology use.
83
19.
Information and Communications Technology in teacher education can be clustered around the four below given competencies. Please rank the competencies in terms of the emphasis given to each in the college where you are training. 1=Really Emphasized.
2= Slightly Emphasized.
3= Not Emphasized.
3
2
1
ICT skills and concepts
Use of ICT in Planning, learning, teaching, assessment and evaluation.
Collaboration and networking amongst teaching professionals Social, Ethical, Legal, and Human issues in ICT use 20. In which of the above mentioned competencies do you feel inadequate as a student preparing to become a teacher?
..........................................................................................................................................
………………………………………………………………………………………...
21. Do you think that the current ICT teacher education curriculum will prepare you adequately to handle ICT issues in the school you will be posted?
………………………………………………………………………………………...
22. If your answer the question 21 is NO, what are the additional skills that you think should be included in the curriculum?
………………………………………………………………………………………...
………………………………………………………………………………………...
………………………………………………………………………………………...
THANK YOU FOR COMPLETING THIS QUESTIONNAIRE
84
9.5
Interview Schedule
1. a) How many computers do you have in the college?
b) How many hours would an individual teacher use computers in a week
2. a) Do you have internet connectivity?
b). How many hours would an individual use internet per week?
3. a) How many hours are the computers idle in a week?
b) Why are the computers not in use during those hours?
4. Averagely, what is the level of expertise of the teachers and students?
5. What are some of the tasks the individuals use computers for?
6. Do teachers plan for the use of ICTs in their schemes of work?
7. Has there been any ICT training for teachers in the last three years?
8. What skills do you think teachers should have to enable them integrate ICT in teaching and learning?
9. According to you, why is the quantity of computer use such low?
10. What are some of the policy interventions that can be used to increase the quantity of computer use?
85
9.6
ICT Initiatives and Projects (Kenya Country Report, InfoDev (2007).
Project: The Learning Resource Centre: Offers training in educational management and integration of ICT for school managers, lecturers, and students.
Organisation(s): Kenya Technical Teachers College in Nairobi
Funding source: Flemish Association for Development and Technical Assistance and UNESCO
(during the first year)
Contact: www.vvobkenya.org/sites/LRCVVOB/index.htm
Project: Provision of computers and training: A primary example of the several
NGOs with similar goals that collaborate under the NICE umbrella.
Organisation(s): Computers in Schools
Funding source: Multiple partners and sources (see list on Web site).
Contact: www.cfsk.org/home.htm
Project: ICT equipment for schools: Computers purchased for 142 schools in support of the ICT in
Education Strategy.
Organisation(s): Kenya ICT Trust Fund
Funding source: Ministry of Education
Contact: www.education.go.ke/ICTFund.htm
Project: Mukuru ICT Centre: ICT skill development for under-privileged youth opened as part of
9
the Mukuru Promotion Centre in Nairobi run by the Sisters of Mercy.
Organisation(s): Corporate consortia led by British Airways
Funding source: British Airways, Microsoft, Cisco, and others.
Contact:
www.education.go.ke/ICTFORUM/ICT%20in%20Africa%20&%20Mukuru%20%20Mrs.%20Mary%20Barry.pdf
Project: Development of Learning Content: digitisation of curriculum content for delivery in schools. Organisation(s): Kenya Institute of Education
Funding source: Ministry of Education
Contact: www.kie.go.ke/
Project: Support Centres: Central and regional centres provide immediate solutions on ICT issues to schools via telephone or online inquiries.
Organisation(s): Ministry of Education
Funding source: Microsoft and the ICT Trust Fund
Contact: www.education.go.ke/Speeches/MN_ICT_Strategy_2August2006.html
86
Project: Sponsored Schools: The introduction of computers and distance learning to supplement teaching and improve learning methods in Aga Khan schools in Kenya.
Organisation(s): Aga Khan Education Services
Funding source: Aga Khan Foundation
Contact: Aga Khan Foundation 's education activities, www.akdn.org/agency/akf_concerns.html#education. Project: Internet cafés: More than 400 Internet cafés have been opened in urban and rural areas where there is electricity.
Organisation(s): Telcolm Kenya
Funding source: Telcolm Kenya
Contact:
Dr.
Speranza
Ndege, www.elearningafrica.com/newsportal/english/news19.php Project: NEPAD e-Schools Initiative: Multi-partner demo project that equipped six secondary schools with state-of-the-art ICTs and provided teacher training and learning content. Organisation(s): e-Africa Commission, Ministry of Education, and two consortia led by Oracle and Microsoft
Funding source: Oracle, Microsoft, and the Ministry of Education
Contact: www.eafricacommission.org/docs/NEPAD%20eSCHOOLS%20DEMO%20OVERVIEW.pdf
Project: Agricultural Non-formal Education: A farmers’ resource centre in
Mwingi district that functions as a community information supermarket is equipped with a computer, a
WorldSpace
radio, a digital data adapter, a printer, a mobile phone, and several informational
CDs.
Organisation(s): Arid Lands Information Network-Eastern Africa (NGO) and the
Ministry of
Agriculture
Funding source: FORD Foundation, NOVIB, DFID, and OXFAM-GB
Contact: www.alin.or.ke/about/who.asp
Project: Computer Skill Development: A free e-learning programme in computer skills for youth living in the slum areas of Nairobi.
10
Organisation(s): Nairobits, an NGO run by local staff
Funding source: Dutch and Irish computer experts
Contact: www.developments.org.uk/data/Issue22/e-for-education.htm
Project: KENET Initiative: An initiative that will establish permanent high-speed
Internet
infrastructure in 22 institutions in the next 12 months; establish or improve node infrastructure 87
within each strategic institution; connect 30 tertiary institutions to the backbone within two years; and expand to 600 secondary and primary schools within two years.
Organisation(s): KENET
Funding source: Ministry of Education, ICT Trust Fund
Contact: www.kenet.or.ke/about/index.php?yah=mission&yeh=objectives
Project: Crossing Borders – East, West, Southern Africa and Central Africa: A cross-cultural distance learning scheme linking young African writers to experienced UK mentors. Organisation(s): Lancaster University
Funding source: British Council
Contact: www.crossingborders-africanwriting.org/about/
Project: School Broadcasting: After a successful one-year pilot, there is now a plan to revive
Kenya’s nationwide school broadcast service, using WorldSpace technology to broadcast educational content to 11 million students in 18,000 primary and 3,000 secondary schools by the end of 2006.
Organisation(s): Kenya Institute of Education (KIE) and WorldSpace
Funding source: WorldSpace Incorporated
Contact: www.itu.int/partners/project.asp?lang=en&id=58
Project: The AVOIR Project: A collaboration among 14 universities to produce educational software while at the same time building software design, development, and support capacity in the higher education sector.
Organisation(s): University of Nairobi and Jomo Kenyatta University of
Agriculture and
Technology
Funding source: IDRC, Department of Science and Technology (South Africa),
UNESCO,
Carnegie Corporation, USAID, Sun Microsystems, International Oceanographic
Data and
Information Exchange
Contact:
http://avoir.uwc.ac.za/avoir/index.php?module=cms&action=viewsection&id=gen
12Srv48Nme
23_2
Project: Free Software Licenses: Microsoft Corporation is providing free access to its operating software for schools and higher education institutions in order to reduce the cost of buying and using computers. The company will work with the organisations involved in supplying computers to
88
the institutions to install the software on the machines.
Organisation(s) : Microsoft and the Ministry of Education
Funding Source: Microsoft
Contact: ICT Director, Ministry of Education, Kenya
89
9.7
Pictures
Picture 9-1: Students using computers in one of the Primary Teacher Training Colleges
90
Picture 9-2:A typical computer laboratory in a Primary Teacher College
91
Picture 9-3:This computer laboratory in one of the Primary Teacher Training Colleges has
Internet connection through a Pre-paid ADSL provided by Telcom Kenya
92
References: pp. 25-50. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston in J.C Clift, B.w. Imri. 1980, ‘The Design of Evaluation for Learning’ Higher Education, Vol Haddad, W.,& Draxler , A (Eds.) 2002), Technologies for education: Potentials, Parameters, and Prospects, Paris:,Unesco. KIC, 2006, Kenya Gazette March, 2006, ‘Information and Communications Technology Guidelines (ICT Policy), Gazette Notice No based on findings of e-readiness survey of higher education institutions in Kenya, 2007. Kozma,R.B Kozma. 2005, ‘National policies that connect ICT-based Education reform to economic and social development’, Human Technology, Vol Meoli K. & Waema T, ICT strategy brief based on findings of e-readiness survey of higher education institutions in Kenya, Kenya Education Network, 2007 Owston, RD. 2000, A meta-evaluation of six case studies of Web-based learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, 2000.
EDUCATION
A case study of the Primary Teacher training Colleges in Kenya
Submitted by
OREDO JOHN OTIENO
To Strathmore University as a dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Science in Information Technology
(MSc.IT)
August 2008
DECLARATION
I certify that this dissertation is my original work and all material in this dissertation which is not my own work has been identified. I further certify that no material has previously been submitted and approved for the award of a degree by this or any other
University.
This dissertation is available for library use on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the dissertation may be published without proper acknowledgement. SIGNED……………………………………………….DATE………………………..
Oredo John Otieno
FIT/047575/06
This project report has been submitted for examination with my approval as the
University Supervisor.
SIGNED……………………………………………………………DATE…………….
Freddie R. Acosta, PhD.
Director – Academic and Research and
Senior Lecturer – Faculty of Information Technology
Strathmore University
i
DEDICATION
To my parents, who worked so hard to ensure we got an education despite the many difficulties.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
My immense gratitude to almighty God for the gift of life and good health, without which I would not reach this far.
I thank my research project supervisor Dr. Freddie Acosta, for the invaluable time he spent discussing with me the progress of this project.
I would also like to acknowledge the tremendous input this piece of work received from Mr.
Kweyu, Mr. Oketch and Mr. Kandiri, all of Strathmore University, Faculty of Information
Technology. Thanks for the time you availed to read this work and the informative discussions we had during the initial stages of this project. Thanks to Mark Sudi, who ran the errands and entered the data collected into the computer for analysis.
Great thanks to the Strathmore School community. Each one of you lent a hand directly or indirectly towards this effort.
To all my friends – hats off, thanks for the tremendous support you have always given me unconditionally. A big asante sana to you all.
iii
Abstract
Teachers are under increasing pressure to use Information and Communication Technology to impart to students the knowledge, skills and attitudes they need to survive in the twenty first century. The teaching profession needs to migrate from a teacher-centred lecture based instruction, o a student–centred interactive learning environment. To attain this aspiration, an ICT enabled teacher education is fundamental. Towards this end, international and national authorities have been spending huge sums of money to facilitate the implementation of ICT teacher education. This work attempts to evaluate the usage of the available ICT facilities in the Kenyan public primary teacher colleges focusing on the quantity of computer use, focus of computer use, and the levels attained in terms of using ICTs to support, expand and transform teaching and learning.
The study shows that the quantity of computer use is still very low and that there is a wide rhetoric-reality gap. The bigger chunk of time spent on computers is used to learn ICT skills.
Since the tool used to perform the evaluation was developed for use in primary schools
(Computer Use Framework), the study proposes a more expanded evaluation framework that can be used to evaluate ICTs in teacher education.
iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ICT
Information and Communication Technology
UNESCO
United Nations Education, Social and Cultural Organization
MDGs
Millennium Development Goals
EFA
Education For All
KESSP
Kenya Education Sector Support Program
ERS
Economic Recovery Strategy
MOEST
Ministry Of Education, Science, and Technology
CPF
Computer Practice Framework
PTTCs
Primary Teacher Training Colleges
SITE
Society for Information and Teacher Education
ISTE
International Society for Technology in Education
v
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1:Computer Practice Framework (Twining, 2002) ............................................ 12
Figure 2-2: Framework for ICTs in Teacher Education (UNESCO, 2002) ...................... 13
Figure 3-1:Research Conceptual Framewor...................................................................... 17
Figure 3-2: Distribution of Primary Teacher Colleges in Kenya (Kenya Country Report,
InfoDev, 2007) .................................................................................................................. 19
Figure 3-3:Data Collection Methods................................................................................. 22
Figure 3-4:The Fraction of Time Computers are in Use compared to Total learning time
........................................................................................................................................... 26
Figure 3-5: The Focus of Computer use............................................................................ 27
Figure 3-6:The Mode of Computer use as a Learning Tool.............................................. 27
Figure 4-1:The Total Quantity of Computer Use by teachers in PTTCs .......................... 30
Figure 4-2:Comparison of Quantity of Computer Use by teachers in the sampled
PTTCs................................................................................................................................ 32
Figure 4-3:Quantity of Computer Use by students in the sampled PTTCs.................... 33
Figure 4-4:Comparison of Quantity of Computer Use by students in the sampled
PTTCs................................................................................................................................ 34
Figure 4-5:Overall Quantity of Computer Use by both teachers and students in the sampled PTTCs ............................................................................................................... 35
Figure 4-6:The Focus of Computer Use by teachers in PTTCs ........................................ 37
Figure 4-7:Summary of Focus of use by teachers in each of the sampled PTTCs ........... 38
Figure 4-8:Focus of Computer Use by students in the sampled PTTCs ........................ 39
Figure 4-9:Comparison of Focus of Computer Use by students in the sampled PTTCs . 40
Figure 4-10:Overall Focus of Computer Use by both teachers and students in the sampled PTTCs ................................................................................................................ 41
Figure 4-11:Use of ICT in teaching and learning in each of the sampled PTTCs ............ 43
Figure 4-12:Use of ICT as a teaching and Learning tool in the sampled PTTCs ............. 44
vi
Figure 4-13:Summary of Teachers general level of expertise in ICT in the sampled
PTTCs................................................................................................................................ 46
Figure 4-14:Summary of Students general level of expertise in ICT in the sampled
PTTCs................................................................................................................................ 48
Figure 4-15:Average levels of expertise of both teachers and students in ICT in the sampled PTTCs ................................................................................................................. 50
Figure 4-16:Summary of the evaluation results using CPF .............................................. 51
Figure 5-1:Conceptual Framework for ICT Monitoring and Evaluation (InfoDev, 2005)53
Figure 5-2:The Proposed Framework ............................................................................... 55
Figure 5-3:Average response to the proposed competencies and indicators for the proposed evaluation framework. ....................................................................................... 57
Figure 6-1:The Implementation Plan ................................................................................ 65
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3-1:Primary Teacher Training Colleges in Kenya by Province .............................. 20
Table 3-2:The Sample percentages for Teaches ............................................................... 21
Table 3-3:The Sample percentages for Students............................................................... 21
Table 3-4:Teachers’ Questionnaire breakdown ................................................................ 23
Table 3-5:Students’ Questionnaire breakdown ................................................................. 23
Table 3-6:Teachers and Students Interviewed. ................................................................. 24
Table 3-7:The Secondary Sources of Data........................................................................ 25
Table 4-1: Quantity of Computer Use by Teachers. ......................................................... 29
Table 4-2:Summary of the Quantity of Computer Use by Teachers................................. 30
Table 4-3:Comparison of Quantity of Computer Use by teachers in the sampled PTTCs31
Table 4-4:Summary of Quantity of Computer Use by Students ....................................... 33
Table 4-5:Comparison of Quantity of Computer Use by Students in the sampled PTTCs
........................................................................................................................................... 34
Table 4-6:Overall Quantity of Computer Use by both Students and Teachers................. 35
Table 4-7:Focus of Computer Use by teachers in the sampled PTTCs ............................ 36
Table 4-8:Summary of Focus of use by teachers in each of the sampled PTTCs............. 37
Table 4-9:Summary of Focus of use by teachers in each of the sampled PTTCs............. 38
Table 4-10:Focus of Computer Use by Teachers and Students the sampled PTTCs........ 40
Table 4-11:Use of Computers as a Teaching and Learning tool by teachers in each of the sampled PTTCs ................................................................................................................. 42
Table 4-12:Summary of Teachers general level of expertise in the sampled PTTCs ...... 45
Table 4-13:Summary of Students general level of expertise in the sampled PTTCs....... 47
Table 4-14:Summary of general level of expertise for both students and Teachers in the sampled PTTCs ................................................................................................................. 49
viii
Table 5-1:Comparison of terminologies used in the general framework for evaluating ICT in education and the Proposed framework for evaluating ICT in teacher education. ....... 54
Table 5-2:Ranking of the proposed competencies and indicators by teachers. ................ 56
Table 5-3: Breakdown of the Mode dimension of Computer Use .................................... 62
Table 5-4: Suggested Indicators of each aspect of Mode of Computer Use ..................... 63
ix
LIST OF PICTURES
Picture 9-1: Students using computers in one of the Primary Teacher Training Colleges90
Picture 9-2:A typical computer laboratory in a Primary Teacher College........................ 91
Picture 9-3:This computer laboratory in one of the Primary Teacher Training Colleges has Internet connection through a Pre-paid ADSL provided by Telcom Kenya .............. 92
x
CONTENTS
Declaration………………………………………………………………………………i
Dedication………………………………………………………………………………..ii
Acknowledgement……………………………………………………………………….iii
Abstract………………………………………………………………………………….iv
List of Abbreviations……………………………………………………………………v
List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………vi
List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………vii
List of Pictures…………………………………………………………………………viii
1.
INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................... 1
1.1
Background..................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2
Curriculum Evaluation .................................................................................................................. 3
1.3
ICT in Teacher Education ............................................................................................................. 3
1.4
Statement of the Problem .............................................................................................................. 4
1.5
Research Questions ........................................................................................................................ 4
1.6
Purpose of the Study ...................................................................................................................... 5
1.7
Significance of the Study................................................................................................................ 5
2.
LITERATURE REVIEW......................................................................................... 6
2.1
Education in Kenya ........................................................................................................................ 6
2.2
Teacher Education in Kenya ......................................................................................................... 7
2.3
ICT in Teacher Education ............................................................................................................. 9
2.4
Evaluation of ICT in Education .................................................................................................. 10
2.5
Evaluation Frameworks............................................................................................................... 11
2.5.1 The Computer Practice Framework (CPF)...................................................................................... 11
2.5.2
A Framework for ICTs in Teacher Education ........................................................................... 13
2.6
3.
3.1
The Need for an Eclectic Model .................................................................................................. 16
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .......................................................................... 17
Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 17
xi
3.2
Study Population .......................................................................................................................... 18
3.3
Sample Population........................................................................................................................ 21
3.4
Data Collection Methods.............................................................................................................. 22
3.4.1
Questionnaires ........................................................................................................................... 23
3.4.2
Interviews .................................................................................................................................. 24
3.4.3
Secondary Sources..................................................................................................................... 24
3.5
4.
Analysis and Presentation............................................................................................................ 26
RESEARCH FINDINGS, PRESENTATION, AND ANALYSIS....................... 29
4.1
Quantity of Computer Use........................................................................................................... 29
4.1.1
Quantity of Computer Use by Teachers .................................................................................... 29
4.1.2
Quantity of Computer Use by Students ..................................................................................... 33
4.1.3
Quantity of Computer Use by Teachers and Students Combined.............................................. 35
4.2
Focus of Computer Use ................................................................................................................ 36
4.2.1
Focus of Computer Use by Teachers ......................................................................................... 36
4.2.2
Focus of Computer Use by Students.......................................................................................... 38
4.2.3
Focus of Computer Use by Teachers and Students Combined .................................................. 40
4.3
The Mode Dimension ................................................................................................................... 42
4.4
Summary of Results ..................................................................................................................... 51
4.5
Inference........................................................................................................................................ 52
5.
RECOMMENDED FRAMEWORK ..................................................................... 53
5.1
General Framework for ICT Monitoring and Evaluation in Education................................. 53
5.2
ICT in Teacher Education ........................................................................................................... 54
5.3
The Proposed Framework ........................................................................................................... 55
5.3.1
The Proposed Competencies...................................................................................................... 56
5.3.2
Development Context ................................................................................................................ 57
5.3.3
Computer Use ............................................................................................................................ 57
5.3.4
Focus of Use .............................................................................................................................. 58
5.3.5
ICT in Teacher Education Competencies .................................................................................. 58
5.3.6
Mode of Computer Use ............................................................................................................. 61
6.
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN................................................................................. 64
6.1
Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 64
6.2
A Three – Phase Implementation Scheme.................................................................................. 65
xii
7.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................ 66
8.
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 67
9.
APPENDICES ......................................................................................................... 71
9.1
Request Letter to Students .......................................................................................................... 71
9.2
Request Letter to Teachers.......................................................................................................... 72
9.3
Questionnaire for Teachers ......................................................................................................... 73
9.4
Questionnaire for Students .......................................................................................................... 79
9.5
Interview Schedule ....................................................................................................................... 85
9.6
ICT Initiatives and Projects (Kenya Country Report, InfoDev (2007).................................... 86
9.7
Pictures.......................................................................................................................................... 90
xiii
xiv
CHAPTER 1
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
During the past decade there has been an exponential growth in the use of information and communication technology (ICT) which has made pervasive impacts both on society and on our daily lives (Yuen, Law, Wong, 2003). ICT has become a principal driver of economic and social change worldwide. As ICTs become ubiquitous and embedded in society, they offer the potential to restructure organizations, promote collaboration, increase democratic participation of citizens, improve the transparency and responsiveness of governmental agencies, make education and healthcare more widely available, foster cultural creativity, and enhance the social integration of individuals with different abilities and groups of different cultural backgrounds (Kozma, 2005a).
Global and national policy makers have been putting effort into crafting policies to enable countries’ to cope with these demands and harness their effects to support economic growth. As
Kozma (2005b) ascertains, policy makers worldwide concur on the fact that education is among the public sectors that most affects – and is most affected by – these developments. Further, the improvement of educational systems and increased educational attainment are seen as primary ways that countries can prepare for these global, technology based changes. And within education, ICT is seen as a way to promote educational change, improve the skills of learners, and prepare them for the global economy and the information society (Haddad & Draxler, 2002;
UNESCO, 2002).
It is thus not surprising to find increasing interest, attention and investment being put into the use of ICT in education all over the world (Yuen, Law, and Wong, 2003). The desire of countries’ to be globally competitive, grow economically and improve social conditions is often used to up the ante for increased investment in educational improvement and the application of ICT in learning institutions. At the global level, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) which have been adopted by the United Nations as the key development targets for the 21st Century, mentions achievement of basic education as one of the prominent goals. This goal builds on the Education
For All (EFA) initiative which was hatched in Jomtien (Thailand) in 1990 and reaffirmed at a second EFA meeting in Dakar in 2000. In the Dakar meeting (UNESCO, 1990, 2000), item 69 explicitly states:
Information and communication technologies (ICT) must be harnessed to support EFA goals at an affordable cost. These technologies have great potential for knowledge
1
dissemination, effective learning and the development of more efficient education services. This potential will not be realized unless the new technologies serve rather than drive the implementation of education strategies. To be effective especially in developing countries, ICTs should be combined with more traditional technologies such as books and radios, and be more extensively applied to the training of teachers.
In tandem with the aforementioned international aspirations, different countries have attempted to craft national policies to guide and direct ICT integration into economic and social programs. In
Kenya, the first comprehensive and stakeholders-driven ICT policy was discussed and approved by the cabinet in January 2006 and an ICT policy document published through the Kenya
Government Gazette notice No. 24 in March 2006 (KIC, 2006). The mission of this policy is a
“Prosperous ICT-driven Kenyan society”, which puts ICT in the centre of national development
(Kashorda, Waema, 2007). The policy, among other national policy areas, addresses issues of
ICT in education in general. The policy aims at encouraging the use of ICT and promoting the growth and development of e-learning across all levels of education in a bid to leverage learning and teaching.
Drawing from the aspirations of the national ICT policy, the Ministry of Education, Science, and
Technology through Sessional Paper No 5 of 2004 on a policy framework for education, training, and research whose vision is “quality education and training for development” targets to achieve
Education for All (EFA) by 2015 (MOEST, 2005). The kernel of the policy is “to integrate ICT education and training into education and training systems in order to prepare learners and staff of today for the Kenyan economy of tomorrow and therefore enhance the nation’s ICT skills”. In
2006, the Ministry of Education crafted the “National Information and Communication
Technology Strategy for Education and Training”, a sector-wide five-year ICT strategy document. The document was developed in line with the sessional paper No. 1 of 2005, national
ICT policy of 2006, Kenya Education Sector Support Program (KESSP) framework, Economic
Recovery Strategy for Wealth Creation (ERS), e-Government strategy of 2004, and the
Millennium Development Goals. The strategy contains details of the strategic objectives, expected outcomes and implementation log frames.
The mission of the strategy is to integrate ICT in education and training for improved access, learning and administration (MOEST, 2006). ICT in the education sector can be clustered in terms of e-Government (which aims at mainstreaming ICT in all government operations, education inclusive), EMIS (Education Management Information Systems whose aim is to furnish education managers and administrators with accurate and timely data for better and informed
2
decision-making) and E-Learning (which aims at mainstreaming ICTs in the teaching and learning process (MOEST, 2006). One way of doing this is through equipping learning institutions, especially secondary schools, and training educators on how to profitably use technology. In the ministry’s ICT integration into education implementation framework, the process has been divided into: review of the ICT policy at a cost of Ksh.6.3 billion and provision of ICT equipment to learning institutions at a cost of Ksh.7.8 billion (MOEST, 2006). This huge investment planned on the entire process of integrating ICTs into education requires that a standard model be used in evaluating how technologies are being used to improve learning and teaching. 1.2
Curriculum Evaluation
The term evaluation has been used to express a variety of meanings and to describe many processes that can leave a considerable amount of confusion on its trail. Lewy (1973) defines evaluation as a process that sets out to judge the merits and deficiencies of a particular educational program produced and administered within a particular context. Another stream of scholars define evaluation as the process of gathering of evidence on the attainment of objectives, forming a judgment on the basis of that evidence, and a weighing of that evidence in the light of the objectives (Taba, 1962). According to Scriven (1967), the aim of any evaluation activity must be “the estimation of merit, worth, and value”. Evaluation is known to serve a critical role in the curriculum, teaching and learning. Indeed, the scope of evaluation determines the types or levels of learning that will get emphasis (Brown, 1961). This paper will adopt the term evaluation as defined by Taba.
1.3
ICT in Teacher Education
Education is at the confluence of powerful and rapidly shifting educational, technological and political forces that will shape the structure of educational systems across the globe (UNESCO,
2002). As noted by the UNESCO World Education Report (1998), the ICTs challenge traditional conceptions of both teaching and learning by configuring how teachers and learners gain access to knowledge. ICTs in teacher education will be used in this context to mean teacher education in
ICTs and teacher education through ICTs.
3
1.4
Statement of the Problem
According to InfoDev (2005), even after over a decade of ICT use in the education sector in developing countries, the ICT for education and development communities are still hard pressed to present satisfactory answers to the following basic question:
•
What is the impact of ICT use in education?
•
What are the good models and lessons that we can learn from, and are these models and lessons scaleable?
•
What does all these cost?
Since the integration of technology into education is an enormous endevour given the country’s poor state of technological infrastructure and manpower, there is, therefore, a need for a systematic evaluation of all the activities of ICT in education. Kashorda and Waema (2007) assert that one of the weaknesses of the Kenya’s national ICT policy is the lack of explicit targets that could be used for policy analysis and evaluation.
From the ICT in education policy paper (MOEST 2005b), it is clear that comprehensive indicators need to be developed to reflect the goals indicated in the ICT in education policy documents. The paper identifies the following as key areas for evaluation:
•
Infrastructure and Access
•
Training and Usage
•
Impacts
This research is intended to come up with a hybrid model that can be used to evaluate the level of
ICT use in education in general but with special reference to PTTCs.
1.5
Research Questions
1. What are the facets of ICT use in education that need to be evaluated to ascertain the worth of ICT investment?
2. To what extent is the CPF relevant in evaluating the impact of ICT investment in education? 3. What dimensions need to be incorporated into CPF to make it relevant for
evaluating ICTs in teacher education?
4
1.6
Purpose of the Study
1. To evaluate the overall use of ICTs using the Computer Practice Framework (CPF)
2. To identify the strengths and the weaknesses of CPF in evaluating ICT use in PTTCs in
Kenya.
3. To improve the CPF to meet evaluation needs of ICTs in teacher education.
1.7
Significance of the Study
As technological advances continue to evolve and proliferate, educators and administrators have sought to integrate technological innovations into the classroom. Introducing ICTs in the education sector can be quite costly in terms of up-front capital costs (for acquiring basic infrastructure) and the recurrent costs (maintenance and human resources training and development). With this rise in implementation and demand comes an increased need to evaluate the effectiveness of technology in education (Owston, 1999, 2000; Windschilt, 1998). A proper evaluation of ICT use in education in general and PTTCs in particular will help us to learn from past experiences, improve service delivery, plan and allocate resources, evaluate policies, and demonstrate results as part of accountability to key stakeholders (World Bank, 2004).
This is important since a bigger chunk of our implementation funds are to be provided for by our development partners and volunteers. The stakeholders will want to know whether the performance indicators are being achieved
5
CHAPTER 2
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
Education in Kenya
Africans had an education system even before the coming of the Europeans. This education system – Traditional African Education (TAE) trained individuals to fit into their societies as useful members through providing skills, knowledge and values relevant to the society. It played the role of socializing individuals to fit and participate adequately in the development of society
(Eshiwani, 1993). Formal education or western education was introduced in Kenya in the nineteenth century by the arrival of John Krapf and Jonathan Rebmann of the Church Missionary
Society (CMS) in 1844 and 1846 respectively (Anderson, 1970; Sheffield, 1973; Furley &
Watson, 1978). They translated the Bible into Kiswahili and started boarding schools for the sons of Chiefs at Rabai Mpya in Mombasa among the Rabai people (Bogonko, 1992). The major aim of missionary education was to produce African “priests” to spread the word of God (Eshiwani,
1993).
Missionaries controlled education in Kenya up to about 1911 when the colonial government stepped in and created a department of education which culminated in the emergence of the first government schools for Africans (Eshiwani,1993). According to Eshiwani (1993) the aim of the colonial education was to create a labour force including chiefs and headmen capable of participating in and perpetuating the indirect rule. The first colonial government’s serious plan for education came in the name of “The Ten Year Plan for the Development of African Education” in 1948 (Bogonko, 1992). The 10-year plan was not received by well by Africans because it did not provide for higher education or make an allowance for compulsory education. It was therefore superceded by the Beecher Education Commission Report of 1949 (Bogonko, 1992). The
Beecher commission enquired into the scope, method and content of African education, its financing and African teachers’ salaries. The report which was implemented in 1952 restructured
African education and renamed its sections as Primary, Intermediate, and Secondary.
Kenya’s struggle for political independence served as a major springboard for her educational development and transformation. Because the colonial legacy consisted of racial system of education – meant to exploit African labour and resources (Eshiwani, 1993), it behooved the
Kenyan government to develop a new education policy and strategy at independence. The
Sessional Paper No. 10 of 1965 served as an important document to address the immediate needs
6
and goals of post–independence education. From 1964-1975, the education structure and development was based on the educational goals and objectives in the Ominde Commission of
1964 whose emphasis was the expansion of education to provide the necessary manpower, economic development and Kenyanization in all sectors (Eshiwani,1993). When the government realized that education was not achieving the desired objectives, a second commission was formed. The National Committee on Educational Objectives and Policies (NCEOP), or the
Gachathi Commission, produced its report in 1976 which recommended a change in education system (Eshiwani, 1993 p28). The report stated in part:
The schools as they are today, do not have capability, time, even motivation to teach the values of the society. This is because the schools are geared entirely to the passing of formal examinations … The questions now, therefore, is how the education system is to build into an organized system of teaching the values of society to the youth
(NCEOP,1976 p.28)
This concern necessitated the setting up of the Presidential Working Party on the Second
University in Kenya, popularly known as the Mackay Commission in 1981. The report stated in part: Education is aimed at enabling the youths to play a more effective role in the life of the nation by imparting to them necessary skills and knowledge and inculcating the right attitude. In practice, however, formal education has tended to concentrate on imparting knowledge for the sake of passing examinations (PWCSU, 1981)
The present 8-4-4 system of education is a product of the Mackay commission’s recommendation. It is geared towards practical and technical education with its objectives summarized by MOE (1984) as follows:
Kenya has one fundamental goal for her education: to prepare and equip the youth to be happy and useful members of Kenyan society. To be happy, they must learn and accept the national values and to be useful they must actively work towards the maintenance and development of the society.
In order to achieve the aims of any education system and to maintain any quality education, the question of teachers becomes paramount. According to OECD (1989), teachers are at the heart of the educational process and therefore, the greater the importance attached to education as a whole, the higher the priority that must be accorded to the teacher responsible for that education.
2.2
Teacher Education in Kenya
The development of teacher education in Kenya can be traced back to the middle of the 19th century when freed slaves were admitted to the Sharanpur Nasik in India to train as teachers
7
amongst other courses in 1860 (Bogonko, 1993). These people returned to Kenya in the 1970s and became pioneers in promoting Christianity and education. Most of the teacher training in
Kenya by the mid 1920s was on the job except high school which was said by the Phelps-Stokes
Commission to be giving good teacher education (Bogonko, 1993). Missionaries dominated the training of teachers up to the eve of independence (Eshiwani, 1999) and virtually every missionary body had teacher training facilities at one or more of its central stations(Bogonko,
1993). By 1930s, the CMS trained their teachers at Kahuhia, Butere, and Kaloleni, Giriama; the
CSM at Kikuyu and Tumutumu. The Roman Catholics trained their teachers at Kabaa and St.
Mary’s Yala. Other centres of training were, Kamagambo(SDA), Kaimosi (Friends Church),
Kima (Church of God Mission). By 1931 there were 15 teacher training institutions of which the missionaries managed 12 while the government managed 3 (Bogonko, 1993).
Despite all the efforts by the missionaries to train the teachers, their general standards were lamentably low (Bogonko,1993). To improve the standard of African education, the standards of teaching had to be raised. The Beecher report (1949) advocated the expansion and improvement of teacher training facilities so as to improve the quality of teachers and as well as replace the untrained teachers with trained ones. In 1962, all the schools were integrated and a unified teaching profession created.
The consolidation of the teaching process in the country has
improved the qualification and quality of primary teachers. The certification of primary school teachers is divided in three levels: P1, P2 and P3. Currently about 75% of the students are admitted at P1 after passing O level examinations. All the three categories receive a pre-service training of two years. Currently there are 20 primary teacher training colleges in Kenya spread across all the provinces.
Due to the fact that teachers are multipliers and key agents in respect to educational change, continuing calls for raising standards of student learning and achievement have now focused national policies upon the quality of teachers and their teaching in classroom (Day, 1999). In
Kenya, according to MOEST(2005), the government is committed to the improvement of primary teacher education to the standards of the latest international trends including equipping the institutions with ICT equipment. Currently, Kenya has 20 primary teacher training colleges all of which are equipped with computers.
8
2.3
ICT in Teacher Education
Computers and related technologies are increasingly influencing many aspects of our social and work lives as well as many of our leisure activities (Teo, Chai, & Leee, 2008) and they have the potential to transform the nature of education (UNESCO, 2002). Education, one of the man’s oldest social activities, is slowly catching the wind of these new computer mediated technologies.
These new technologies, coupled with a worldwide challenge to educate all children, has led to a global reform and development of teacher education (Moon, 2004). Given that teachers act as the change agents for technology in education (Zhao, Hueyshan & Mishra, 2001), it is essential that in-service and pre-service teachers have basic ICT skills and competencies.(UNESCO, 2002).
UNESCO (2000) emphasizes that teachers, professors and school administration staff must be given training that enable them to integrate ICTs into their teaching programs.
It is therefore widely accepted that ICTs must be an essential component in teacher education. In fact, the question amongst the proponents of ICT use in education is no longer “if” but rather
“which” and “how” these technologies can be effectively implemented. At the regional level,
Nepad (2001) has articulated in its agenda that a functional education that integrates ICT into educational instruction and especially into the training of teachers should come into effect between 2006 and 2015. Many countries, Kenya included, are engaged in a number of efforts to effect changes in the teaching and learning processes to prepare students for information and technology based society (UNESCO, 2002). Towards this end, The National Information and
Communication Technology Strategy for Education and Training (MOEST, 2006), recognizes that the integration of technology to support teaching and learning is necessary to improve learning outcomes and prepare students for the demanding job markets.
In spite of these efforts and aspirations towards enhancing the use of ICTs in teacher education,
Salmon and Perkins (1996) express concern about the effectiveness of these innovations in education. According to Nepad (2001), one of the major problems of introducing ICT to the training of teachers in Africa is the appropriation and distribution of budgets necessary for the implementations. Many scholars fear that the payoff of spending for technology in education is not being empirically evaluated. ( Ehrmann, 1999). A bottleneck to the effective evaluation of technology is that technology evolves at such a fast pace that often times the conclusions from summative studies are often out-dated by the time they are completed (Heincke et al, 1999). Fast-paced
9
technological development also makes it difficult for researchers to do theoretically grounded and rigorous research that should guide the development and adoption of technology in learning environments (Alavi & Leidner, 2001). In essence there should be a pedagogically grounded reason for adopting a new technology for educational purposes. Ehrmann (1999) suggests that we study which teaching and learning strategies facilitate the learning process and then study which technologies best support these teaching and learning strategies.
The above issues are meant to stimulate educators, administrators and other stakeholders to plan an evaluation component into the theoretically grounded adoption of new technologies in the classroom. While most researchers in the field would take cudgels with this position, Ehrmann
(1995) cautions evaluators about making decisions solely based on the unit cost of a program, because this can be difficult to estimate. Evaluations of technology based on the principles of teaching and learning will surely bring us a step forward in understanding not only which technologies work best, but why.
Kenya has placed considerable emphasis on the importance of ICT in its Education Sector
Support Programme (KESSP) as evidenced in the promulgation of the National ICT Strategy for
Education and Training. The Ministry of Education has taken steps to support the implementation of the strategy either by direct action or through the various institutions and agencies with which it works. In addition, there are many other organizations not involved directly with the Ministry of Education that continue to be active in implementing and supporting projects involving ICT in education. Information about some of these organizations have been synthesized and presented in
Appendix 9.6.
2.4
Evaluation of ICT in Education
Most discussions on educational evaluation refer to particular locales (for example, the classroom or the province) or particular purposes (for example, achievement or selection), and models of evaluation are similarly limited. A myriad methods and technologies have been in the past used to evaluate technology and learning. The argument has been that since learning environments and stakeholder interests are multi-faceted, it is impossible to use a single evaluation method. Owston
(2000) states that one model or framework is unlikely to capture the complexity of the relationship between technology and learning, especially in a view of pedagogical, organizational, institutional and technical issues. To account for this complexity, evaluators and researchers have developed several evaluation frameworks.
10
2.5
Evaluation Frameworks
Current approaches to course evaluation particularly in higher education, still seem to follow the paradigm laid by Bloom (1970) when he defined evaluation as a process of determining the achievement of specific educational objectives.
Among the many methods to the evaluation of technology and instruction in the literature, theorists (Jackson, 1990; Young, 2002) note six major ones: describing the universe, applying criteria, comparing institutions, improving programs, identifying outcomes, and justifying programs. Bullock and Ory ( 2001) also mention three other types of evaluations that appear less often in the literature: illuminative (Stake, 1978), participatory (Cousins & Earl, 1992), and integrative (Draper, Brown, Hederson, & McAteer, 1996). Illuminative evaluations use qualitative techniques to describe the impact of technology. Measuring the impact of technology is not the main concern. Rather, the goal of this type of evaluation is to uncover problems, issues or concerns. Participatory evaluations “involve a partnership between evaluation personnel and different evaluation audiences” (Bullock & Ory 2000, P.318). Integrative evaluations are concerned with the goal of effectively integrating technology into a teaching and learning situation ( Bullock & Ory, 2000).
Literature suggests that there has been (and continues to be) substantial financial investment in computer use at all educational levels (e.g. Lemke & Coughlin, 1998; Twining & McCormick,
1999). The motivation for such investment is varied, but often justified in terms of the potential impact that computer use has to enhance students’ learning (Twining, 2002). This situation, in which substantial amount of money are being invested in ICT in education but are not having substantial impact in schools is not sustainable. In order to justify continuity of investment, evidence needs to be found of ICT’s use effectiveness, and ways need to be found to increase the impact of those investments. There is, therefore great need to enhance the impact of investing in computer use in education at all levels (Twining, 2002).
2.5.1 The Computer Practice Framework (CPF)
The CPF was researched Peter twining of Open University and was published in 2002. The CPF has been chosen as a basis for this research because of its simplicity while at the same time presenting a rich picture. The CPF comprises of three core dimensions called the Quantity, Focus, and Mode. Quantity evaluates the quantity of computer use as a proportion of the available learning time. The focus dimension identifies the objectives supported by the computer use, while
11
the mode is concerned with parameters that measure the impact of computer use on the curriculum (Twining, 2002).
Figure 2-1:Computer Practice Framework (Twining, 2002)
12
2.5.2
A Framework for ICTs in Teacher Education
According to UNESCO (2002), ICT in teacher education can be organized around four competencies as follows:
1. Content and Pedagogy – focused on teachers’ instructional practices and knowledge of the curriculum.
2. Collaboration and networking – acknowledges communicative potential of ICTs to extend learning beyond the classroom.
3. Technical issues – teachers update their skills with software and hardware as new generations of technology emerge.
4. Social/Emerging Issues – competence to acknowledge that technology brings with it new rights and responsibilities.
Figure 2-2: Framework for ICTs in Teacher Education (UNESCO, 2002)
13
2.6
The Need for an Eclectic Model
While the description and trialing of CPF was based in the context of primary schools, Twining
(2002) states that it can be applied in other educational contexts with minor modifications to the terminology used and exemplification provided. Twining, further notes that any conceptual framework inevitably has a value judgment about which aspects of practice are significant. It is on this backdrop that this research proposes a new eclectic model founded on the pillars of the
CPF model relevant for evaluation of computer use in teacher education. InfoDev (the
Information for Development Program) also observes in its report (infoDev, 2005) that no standard reference or methodology exists to evaluate ICT in education programmes including teacher education. This study proposes a triangulated approach by combining the CPF and the
UNESCO’s framework for ICTs in teacher education.
16
CHAPTER 3
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1
Introduction
The study takes in the CPF as its input. The CPF is then used to evaluate ICT use in PTTCs to enable the researcher identify its weaknesses and strengths. The framework is then improved towards a new framework that can effectively be used to evaluate ICT use in teacher education.
While the independent variables are derived from computer use within the institution, some extraneous factors may have some impact on the results. These factors may include computer use at home or cybercafés by respondents. An attempt has been made to capture these extraneous variables, but it is difficult to determine the extent to which they affect the results.
Figure 3-1:Research Conceptual Framewor
17
3.2
Study Population
This research was carried out in public Primary Teacher Training Colleges in Kenya. The PTTCs were chosen because they represent the basic teacher education institutions. The PTTCs also made a good research population for this study because of the government’s commitment in improving primary teacher education to make it more relevant to the needs of the country and in tandem with the latest international trends in teacher education (MOEST, 2005c).
Currently there are 20 public PTTCs in Kenya almost all of which have computer labs and are making bold efforts to establish and improve PTTC ICT capacity. The PTTCs enroll an average of 500 students annually for a two year course with 20 to 40 staff members. This leads to a population of 20,000 students and 800 teachers in all the PTTCs. Figure 3-2 below shows the distribution of teacher training colleges in Kenya.
18
Figure 3-2: Distribution of Primary Teacher Colleges in Kenya (Kenya Country Report, InfoDev,
2007)
19
Table 3-1:Primary Teacher Training Colleges in Kenya by Province
S.NO COLLEGE
ADDRESS
PROVINCE
1
ASUMBI
BOX 119 KISII
NYANZA
2
MOI BARINGO
BOX 1, SERETUNIN
RIFT VALLEY
3
BONDO
BOX 424, BONDO
NYANZA
4
EGOJI
PRIV.BAG, EGOJI
EASTERN
5
EREGI
BOX100, MARAGOLI
WESTERN
6
GARISSA
BOX 496, GARISSA
NORTH EASTERN
7
KAIMOSI
BOX TIRIKI
WESTERN
8
KAMWENJA
BOX 152, NYERI
CENTRAL
9
KERICHO
BOX 10, KERICHO
RIFT VALLEY
10
ST MARK’S KIGARI
PRI.BAG, EMBU
EASTERN
11
KILIMAMBOGO
BOX 8, THIKA
CENTRAL
12
MACHAKOS
BOX 124,MACHAKOS
EASTERN
13
MERU
BOX 46, MERU
EASTERN
14
MIGORI
BOX 123, SUNA
NYANZA
15
MOSORIOT
BOX 100, MOSORIOT
RIFT VALLEY
16
MURANGA
BOX 232, MAKUYU
CENTRAL
17
NAROK
BOX 709, NAROK
RIFT VALLEY
18
SHANZU
BOX 90533,MOMBASA
COAST
19
TAMBACH
PRIV.BAG, TAMBACH
RIFT VALLEY
20
THOGOTO
BOX KIKUYU
CENTRAL
20
3.3
Sample Population
A sample of 8 colleges was picked from the 20 colleges forming the research population. This was 40% of the total number of institutions. The five institutions were selected on the basis of being accessible easily to the researcher. From each institution a sample of 10 teachers were chosen at randomly. The students were clustered into First and Second years from which a sample of 10 students was chosen at randomly from each cluster.
Table 3-2:The Sample percentages for Teaches
S.NO
COLLEGE
TOT TEACHERS SAMPLE SAMPLE %
1 THOGOTO
67
10
15
2 MACHAKOS
81
10
12
3 KILIMAMBOGO
78
10
13
4 KAMWENJA
0
0
0
5 MURANGA
67
10
15
6 KAIMOSI
69
10
14
7 NAROK
0
0
0
8 BONDO
53
10
19
TOTAL
415
60
14
Table 3-3:The Sample percentages for Students
S.NO
COLLEGE
STUDENTS
1 THOGOTO
2 MACHAKOS
3 KILIMAMBOGO
4 KAMWENJA
5 MURANGA
6 NAROK
7 BONDO
8 KAIMOSI
TOTAL
SAMPLE SAMPLE %
650
20
3
949
20
2
1050
20
2
0
0
0
708
20
3
0
0
0
700
20
3
1100
20
2
5157
120
2
21
3.4
Data Collection Methods
The two major approaches of data collection – qualitative and quantitative methods were used.
On the side of quantitative, primary and secondary data sources were used. secondary and primary data sources were used in this study. The secondary sources were used to collect data that already exist about public PTTCs in Kenya and their status in ICT use. Since these PTTCs are government institutions, a lot of their operations are based on policies set by the government through the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MOEST). Another source of valuable information on education is the United Nations Education, Social, and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO).
Figure 3-3:Data Collection Methods
22
3.4.1
Questionnaires
Questionnaires were chosen as the best instrument for this study because of a number of reasons:
•
The public PTTCs are spread all over the country and therefore it was practically impossible to interview the target respondents – teachers and students.
•
It gives respondents anonymity, students and teachers would fill them truthfully thus improving reliability of the results.
•
Its is an economical and convenient way of collecting data especially where there are time constraints.
Different questionnaires were used for both the teachers and students. While the majority of questions were different, a number of questions were similar for validity and reliability reasons.
The questionnaires consisted of both open ended and closed-ended questions.
Table 3-4:Teachers’ Questionnaire breakdown
Parts
No. of Questions
Personal Details
3
Professional Details
3
ICT Use
7
Focus of ICT use
7
Competencies for Evaluation
4
TOTAL
24
Table 3-5:Students’ Questionnaire breakdown
Parts
No. of Questions
Personal Details
2
ICT Use
8
Focus of ICT use
7
Competencies for Evaluation
5
TOTAL
22
23
3.4.2
Interviews
Qualitative method was used in the form of both Focus Group Discussions (FGD) and In depth
Interviews (IDI). The Focus Group Discussions were conducted with groups of 6 students in three colleges. The students were picked on the basis of those who were available on the day of the interview. These were mainly first year students as second year students were busy with their final national examinations.
The In depth interviews were mainly conducted with the ICT teachers. In some cases where teachers of other subjects were available and willing to give an interview, they were included in the interview schedule. Again it was difficult to schedule interviews with teachers as a majority of them were involved in the administration of national examinations.
Table 3-6:Teachers and Students Interviewed.
College
In Depth Interviews
Machakos
Focus Group Discussion
ICT teacher
Dean of Curriculum
6 students
H.O.D Creative Arts
Muranga
ICT teacher
B/Studies Teacher
Thogoto
6 students
ICT teacher
Non
Mathematics Teacher
3.4.3
Secondary Sources
A good number of secondary sources were consulted during the data collection process. Many international bodies that deal with education produce periodical reports on the status of various aspects of education. Such bodies include but are not limited to the United Nations Education,
Social and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), InfoDev which is a publication of World Bank and
New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD).
The government of Kenya through the Ministry of Education has also released several policy papers on education and more recently on the role of ICT in education. The particular policy papers that were consulted in this study are summarized in the Table 3-7.
24
Table 3-7:The Secondary Sources of Data
Document
Source
1
Ministry
National ICT policy
of
Information
and
Communication, 2006.
2
National Information and Communication Ministry of Education, June, 2006
Technology (ICT) Strategy for Education and
Training
3
ICTs in Education Options Paper
Ministry
of
Education,
Science
and
Technology, 2005
4
E-readiness Survey of Higher Education Kenya
Institutions in Kenya – ICT brief 2007.
5
Monitoring and
Evaluation
of
ICT
Education
Network
(KENET),
August, 2007.
in Information for Development (infoDev) –
Education Projects.
The International Bank of Reconstruction and Development
(World
Bank),
November, 2005
6
Survey of ICT and Education in Africa: Information for Development (infoDev) –
Kenya Country Report.
The International Bank of Reconstruction and Development (World Bank), April,
2007.
7
Information
Technologies
and in Teacher
Communication United Nations Education, Scientific, and
Education:
A Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 2002.
Planning Guide.
25
3.5
Analysis and Presentation
The first research question of this study is concerned with determining the levels of computer use using the CPF. The study takes the amount of computer use and then identifies the focus of the use. This information and others are then used to develop an evaluation framework for Primary
Teacher Education (PTE). The amount of computer use is determined by calculating the total amount of time computers are in use in relation to the 8 hours a day of learning and teaching on weekdays. Figure 3-4:The Fraction of Time Computers are in Use compared to Total learning time
The next part of the analysis looks at the focus of the computer use. It determines the fraction of computer use dedicated to learning ICT itself (IT), learning about other subjects other than computers (Learning Tool) and what fraction of use that serve other purposes other than IT and
Learning Tool e.g. prestige.
26
Figure 3-5: The Focus of Computer use
The last part of the CPF analyses the mode of the Learning Tool aspect of the focus. It determines the levels at which the computers are used to support, extend or transform learning.
Figure 3-6:The Mode of Computer use as a Learning Tool
27
The quantity of computer use was given by respondents through answering an open ended question. Likert scale questions were analyzed to arrive at the focus and mode segments of computer use in the various institutions studied. In cases where a teacher or student indicated that he/she had no computers available for use but filled in subsequent sections concerned with focus and mode, the answers were nullified. This is because there must be “computer use” for the Focus and Mode dimensions to be valid. The comparisons between different foci or mode of computer use are presented in the form of tables and bar graphs.
28
CHAPTER 4
4. RESEARCH FINDINGS, PRESENTATION, AND ANALYSIS
4.1
Quantity of Computer Use
In establishing the quantity of computer use, teachers were asked to indicate the number of hours in which they have access to computers in a week. The following assumptions were made:
•
Access to computers implies having a computer available for use regardless of the purpose of use.
•
The computers could only be available for 8 hours a day for 5 days in a week – time during which teaching and learning takes place, resulting into a total of 40 hours per week. •
Quantity of computer use restricted to use within the institution. Any access to computers outside the institution is not factored in.
4.1.1
Quantity of Computer Use by Teachers
A total number of 40 teachers out of the 45 who returned their filled questionnaires responded by indicating the number of hours they use computers at their various institutions. The table below gives a summary of the response numbers. 5 teachers did not respond to the question.
Table 4-1: Quantity of Computer Use by Teachers.
COLLEGE CODE
SAMPLED
RESPONSE
200
8
8
201
6
6
202
7
7
204
9
8
205
5
5
206
10
6
TOTAL
45
40
Total Number of Hours Computers were Available= 40 x 8 x 5
=1600hrs/week
29
Table 4-2:Summary of the Quantity of Computer Use by Teachers
Hours/Week
Percentage
IN USE
346
21.63
NOT IN USE
1254
78.38
TOTAL
1600
100
The analysis of the data collected indicated that computer use by teachers was 22 % of the total time computers were available for use as represented by Figure 4.1 below.
QUANTITY OF COMPUTER USE BY TEACHERS
IN USE
1
NOT IN USE
IN USE, 22
0
10
NOT IN USE, 78
20
30
40
50
60
70
PERCENTAGE USE
Figure 4-1:The Total Quantity of Computer Use by teachers in PTTCs
30
80
90
100
110
Comparison of Computer Use among the sampled PTTCs
Table 4-3:Comparison of Quantity of Computer Use by teachers in the sampled PTTCs
College
Hrs/Week
% IN USE
Total
USE
Hrs/Week
Code
% NOT IN No.
Teachers
C202
88
280
31
69
7
C200
87
320
27
73
8
C201
82
240
34
66
6
C204
19
320
6
94
8
C205
64
200
32
68
5
C206
6
240
3
78
6
TOTALS
346
1600
22
78
40
31
Of
COMPARISON OF COMPUTER USE AMONG SAMPLED COLLEGES
IN USE
NOT IN USE
100%
90%
80%
% IN U S E /N O T IN U S E
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
C202
C200
C201
C204
C205
C206
COLLEGES
Figure 4-2:Comparison of Quantity of Computer Use by teachers in the sampled PTTCs
32
4.1.2
Quantity of Computer Use by Students
The analysis of the data collected indicated that computer use by students was a low 6 % of the total time computers were available for use as represented by Figure 4.3 below.
Table 4-4:Summary of Quantity of Computer Use by Students
Hours
% hours
IN USE
232
6
NOT IN USE
3888
94
COMPUTER USE BY STUDENTS IN THE SAMPLED COLLEGES
IN USE
1 IN USE, 6
0%
NOT IN USE
NOT IN USE, 94
20%
40%
60%
Figure 4-3:Quantity of Computer Use by students in the sampled PTTCs
33
80%
100%
Table 4-5:Comparison of Quantity of Computer Use by Students in the sampled PTTCs
College
% IN USE
Total
Hrs/Week
USE
Hrs/Week
Code
% NOT IN No.
Students
C202
35
640
5
95
16
C200
47
800
6
94
20
C201
48
800
6
94
20
C204
26
560
5
95
14
C205
40
720
6
94
18
C206
36
600
6
94
15
TOTALS
232
4120
6
94
103
COMPARISION OF QUANTITY OF COMPUTER USE BY STUDENTS IN SAMPLED COLLEGES
IN USE
NOT IN USE
100%
90%
80%
% QUANTITY
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
C202
C200
C201
C204
C205
C206
COLLEGES
Figure 4-4:Comparison of Quantity of Computer Use by students in the sampled PTTCs
34
Of
4.1.3
Quantity of Computer Use by Teachers and Students Combined
The overall computer use by both the students and teachers were as follows:
Table 4-6:Overall Quantity of Computer Use by both Students and Teachers
STUDENTS
TEACHERS
TOTAL
IN USE %
6
22
14
NOT IN USE %
94
78
86
OVERALL QUANTITY OF COMPUTER USE BY BOTH STUDENTS AND TEACHERS IN THE
SAMPLED COLLEGES
NOT IN USE
IN USE
1
IN USE, 14
0%
10%
NOT IN USE, 86
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Figure 4-5:Overall Quantity of Computer Use by both teachers and students in the sampled PTTCs
35
100%
4.2
Focus of Computer Use
This dimension of the CPF deals with the objectives underlying the computer use. It is divided into three categories. The focus dimension is divided into three different categories as follows:
1. IT – Using computers to help learners develop their IT skills.
2. Learning Tool – Using computers to support aspects of learning other than IT skills.
3. Other – Using computers in ways not covered by IT or Learning Tool.
Data for this section was collected by asking the respondents to grade on a scale of four (0-3) their use of computers for classroom teaching/learning, collaboration, and evaluation. The use was based on an estimate of the frequency of use.
4.2.1
Focus of Computer Use by Teachers
Table 4-7:Focus of Computer Use by teachers in the sampled PTTCs
SCORE/3 Pts
Teaching/Learning
Collaboration
Evaluation
LEARNING/TEACHING
TOOL
IT SKILLS & OTHER
% SCORE
0.57
36.63
0.29
18.38
0.70
44.49
0.52
17.4
2.48
82.6
The amount of use for IT skills & Other was derived from the results of Learning/Teaching tool.
It was assumed that the time in which computers were used but not for Learning and Teaching purposes, it was being used for IT skills & Other. It was noted that just a mere 20% of computer use was focused on Teaching and Learning.
36
FOCUS OF COMPUTER USE BY TEACHERS
LEARNING/TEACHING TOOL
LEARNING/TEACHING TOOL,
1
17.40
0.00
20.00
IT SKILLS & OTHER
IT SKILLS & OTHER, 82.60
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
Figure 4-6:The Focus of Computer Use by teachers in PTTCs
It was noted that there is no significant difference between colleges on the focus of computer as demonstrated by the results from each college.
Table 4-8:Summary of Focus of use by teachers in each of the sampled PTTCs
TEACHING &
ICT SKILLS & OTHERS
COLLEGE
LEARNING
C202
0.66
2.34
C200
0.57
2.43
C201
0.62
2.38
C204
0.46
2.54
C205
0.39
2.61
C206
0.49
2.51
AVERAGE TOTALS
0.53
2.47
% AVERAGE TOTALS
17.72
82.28
37
120.00
FOCUS OF COMPUTER USE BY TEACHERS IN THE SAMPLED COLLEGES
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
ICT SKILLS & OTHERS
TEACHING & LEARNING
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
C202
C200
C201
C204
C205
C206
COLLEGES
Figure 4-7:Summary of Focus of use by teachers in each of the sampled PTTCs
4.2.2
Focus of Computer Use by Students
Table 4-9:Summary of Focus of use by teachers in each of the sampled PTTCs
NO. OF
TEACHING &
ICT SKILLS &
STUDENTS
LEARNING
OTHERS
C202
16
0.3625
0.6375
C200
20
0.35
0.65
C201
20
0.18
0.82
C204
14
0.3786
0.6241
C205
18
0.4056
0.5944
C206
15
0.3625
0.6375
AVERAGE TOTALS
104
0.3398
0.6605
33.46
66.54
COLLEGE
%
AVERAGE 100
TOTALS
38
FOCUS OF COMPUTER USE BY STUDENTS
IT & OTHER
LEARNING TOOL
1
0.00
LEARNING TOOL, 33.46
20.00
IT & OTHER, 66.54
40.00
60.00
80.00
Figure 4-8:Focus of Computer Use by students in the sampled PTTCs
39
100.00
120.00
FOCUS OF USE BY EACH COLLEGE
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
ICT & OTHER SKILLS
LEARNING TOOL
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
C202
C200
C201
C204
C205
C206
COLLEGES
Figure 4-9:Comparison of Focus of Computer Use by students in the sampled PTTCs
4.2.3
Focus of Computer Use by Teachers and Students Combined
Table 4-10:Focus of Computer Use by Teachers and Students the sampled PTTCs
TEACHERS
AVG. TOTAL
& 33.46
17.4
25.43
& 66.54
82.6
74.57
STUDENTS
TEACHING
LEARNING %
ICT
SKILLS
OTHERS %
40
FOCUS OF COMPUTER USE BY STUDENTS AND TEACHERS COMBINED
LEARNING TOOL
1
LEARNING TOOL, 25.43
0
20
IT & OTHER
IT & OTHER, 74.57
40
60
80
100
Figure 4-10:Overall Focus of Computer Use by both teachers and students in the sampled PTTCs
41
120
4.3
The Mode Dimension
The mode dimension of the CPF is concerned with the impact that computer use has on the curriculum but excluding the IT curriculum. This includes both the content and the processes of the curriculum. The mode dimension is subdivided into three categories:
1. Support – Automating various aspects of the curriculum without changing the processes.
2. Extend – Using computers to enrich learning across the curriculum.
3. Transform – Using computers to fundamentally change the teaching and learning processes. This dimension was not measured directly due to the following complexities:
1. It was practically impossible for teachers to classify the mode of use since use of computers was not planned.
2. Teachers were not conversant with what comprises Support, Extension, or
Transformation of teaching and learning focus of computer use.
The results for this dimension were therefore derived on the basis of the following:
1. Judging by how computers were used for teaching and learning – as shown by figure 4.5 below, mainly for automation of results calculation, the study concluded that the mode is still at the support level.
Table 4-11:Use of Computers as a Teaching and Learning tool by teachers in each of the sampled PTTCs
COLLEGE CLASSROOM COLLABORATION EVALUATION
AV.
TEACHING
TOTAL
&
TEACHING
LEARNING
&
LEARNING
C202
0.64
0.33
1.00
0.66
C200
0.56
0.46
0.69
0.57
C201
0.33
0.33
1.20
0.62
C204
0.69
0.19
0.50
0.46
C205
0.50
0.27
0.40
0.39
C206
0.59
0.22
0.67
0.49
AV TOT
0.55
0.30
0.74
0.53
% AV TOT
18.42
9.99
24.75
17.72
42
USE OF ICT FOR TEACHING & LEARNING BY COLLEGE
COLLABORATION
CLASSROOM TEACHING & LEARNING
EVALUATION
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
C202
C200
C201
C204
C205
COLLEGES
Figure 4-11:Use of ICT in teaching and learning in each of the sampled PTTCs
43
C206
USE OF ICT AS A TEACHING & LEARNING TOOL
CLASSROOM TEACHING & LEARNING
% AV TOT
0.00
34.66
COLLABORATION
18.80
20.00
40.00
EVALUATION
46.54
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
% AV TOT
EVALUATION
46.54
COLLABORATION
18.80
CLASSROOM TEACHING & LEARNING
34.66
Figure 4-12:Use of ICT as a teaching and Learning tool in the sampled PTTCs
2. The conclusion in (1) above was further supported by the fact that the expertise levels of teachers in IT skills is still very low – being just able to perform basic computer operations and word processing applications. The assumption is that for a teacher to be able to use computers to extend, or transform learning, (s)he must have very good or excellent IT skills.
44
Table 4-12:Summary of Teachers general level of expertise in the sampled PTTCs
Expertise
Description
Level Number
Percentage
NON
-Can not use computers at
L1
3
7
L2
30
68
L3
4
9
L4
6
14
L5
1
2
44
100
all
FAIR
-Basic computer operations and word processing
GOOD
-Able to use all office applications for school related work.
VERY GOOD
-All the above skills plus use of Internet and its resources. EXCELLENT
-All the above plus use of email, Internet surfing and searching, development of web pages, participation in e-learning. TOTAL
45
TEACHERS ' LEVELS OF EXPERTISE IN THE SAMPLED COLLEGES
80
LEVEL OF EXPERTISE
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
LEVELS
Figure 4-13:Summary of Teachers general level of expertise in ICT in the sampled PTTCs
46
Table 4-13:Summary of Students general level of expertise in the sampled PTTCs
Expertise
Description
Level Number
Percentage
NON
-Can not use computers at
L1
5
5
L2
55
54
L3
33
33
L4
7
7
L5
1
1
101
100
all
FAIR
-Basic computer operations and word processing
GOOD
-Able to use all office applications for school related work.
VERY GOOD
-All the above skills plus use of Internet and its resources. EXCELLENT
-All the above plus use of email, Internet surfing and searching, development of web pages, participation in e-learning. TOTAL
47
STUDENTS ' LEVELS OF EXPERTISE IN THE SAMPLED COLLEGES
60
LEVEL OF EXPERTISE
50
40
30
20
10
0
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
LEVELS
Figure 4-14:Summary of Students general level of expertise in ICT in the sampled PTTCs
48
Table 4-14:Summary of general level of expertise for both students and Teachers in the sampled
PTTCs
Expertise
Description
Average
Level % Number
Teachers Students Percentage
NON
-Can not use
L1
7
5
6
L2
68
54
61
L3
9
33
21
L4
14
7
10
L5
2
1
2
100
100
100
computers at all
FAIR
-Basic computer operations and word processing GOOD
-Able to use all office applications for school related work.
VERY GOOD
-All the above skills plus use of Internet and its resources.
EXCELLENT
-All the above plus use of e-mail, Internet surfing and searching, development of web pages, participation in e-learning. TOTAL
49
AVERAGE LEVELS OF EXPERTISE OF BOTH TEACHERS AND STUDENTS COMBINED
70
LEVEL OF EXPERTISE
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
LEVELS
Figure 4-15:Average levels of expertise of both teachers and students in ICT in the sampled PTTCs
50
4.4
Summary of Results
Figure 4-16:Summary of the evaluation results using CPF
51
4.5
Inference
It is a well known fact that computer laboratories in educational institutions in Africa are underutilized (Unwin, 2004).The overall quantity of computer use by both teachers and students in the sampled schools stand at 14%. It is indicative to note that 5 out of 6 teachers who had access time of more than 10 hours a week (about 83% quantity of use) have computers in their offices. Since most institutions have just one computer lab for both teachers and students, most teachers find it difficult to access computers due to two main reasons. First, many teachers may be uncomfortably using computers side by side with students. Secondly, most of the times, computers are scheduled for students use but not teachers. Other indirect causes of low quantity of computer use were cited as:
1. Scarcity of time for both students and teachers
2. Inadequate computers.
3. Lack of basic ICT skills
4. Lack of appropriate software
5. Lack of Internet facilities
6. Some teachers indicated lack of technical support as contributing.
The PTTCs have an average of 69 teachers and 859 students each with an average of 45 computers. This gives a ration of 1:14( One computer to 14 people). A respondent (Respondent1) from college C201 said that teachers who do not have computers in their offices hardly use computers and have a tendency of giving out their work to be done by computer teachers.
Respondent3 in the same college said that teachers are mostly occupied with teaching and therefore have less time to use computers.
Recommendations
1. Increasing the quantity of computer hardware.
2. Provision of portable computers to reduce physical constraints.
3. Computers could be used in the evenings and at night by addressing the issues of security and staffing.
4. Kenya Institute of Education needs to develop local digital curriculum content.
5. Need for ICT champions in every PTTC
6. In-Service of all PTTC college tutors in basic ICT skills.
7. On-going specialized training on ICT integration in every subject offered at the PTTC
52
CHAPTER 5
5. RECOMMENDED FRAMEWORK
5.1
General Framework for ICT Monitoring and Evaluation in Education
Figure 5-1:Conceptual Framework for ICT Monitoring and Evaluation (InfoDev, 2005)
This general conceptual framework takes into account all the broad development concerns including context-sensitive issues related to ICT use for educational development. The use of
ICTs and ICT impact should be considered within this broad development context. Once this context is established, and the role of ICT is identified, then a plan for evaluation can be designed. While the framework identifies all the ICT interventions that need to be evaluated, this study is concerned with the teacher training component. The teacher training component can has been divided into four key areas:
1. Equipment operation
2. Software use
3. Instruction
4. Interaction
53
These key components informed the development of the proposed framework. In the proposed framework, new terminologies proper to teacher education as a discipline have been used to express the above mentioned components. In the proposed framework, the terminologies have been used as shown in the table below
Table 5-1:Comparison of terminologies used in the general framework for evaluating ICT in education and the Proposed framework for evaluating ICT in teacher education.
General Framework for ICT Monitoring Proposed
Framework
for
and Evaluation in Education.
Evaluation in Teacher Education
Equipment operation
ICT
ICT Usage Skills
Software use
Instruction
Content and Pedagogy
Interaction
Collaboration and Networking
The proposed framework incorporates the social and health issues component to take of the increased need for teachers to address the challenges posed by adoption of technology in the society, locally and globally.
5.2
ICT in Teacher Education
According to UNESCO (2002), ICT in teacher education can be organized around four competencies as follows:
1. Content and Pedagogy – Focused on teachers’ instructional practices and knowledge of the curriculum.
2. Collaboration and networking – Acknowledges communicative potential of ICTs to extend learning beyond the classroom.
3. Technical issues – Teachers update their skills with software and hardware as new generations of technology emerge.
4. Social/Emerging Issues – Competence to acknowledge that technology brings with it new rights and responsibilities.
54
5.3
The Proposed Framework
Figure 5-2:The Proposed Framework
55
5.3.1 The Proposed Competencies
Research done with teachers on the effectiveness of the CPF indicated that it was reliable for measuring quantity of computer use but the focus and mode dimensions were not reliable when applied to secondary descriptions of computer use (Twining,
2002). Several respondents commented that the difficulties encountered were due to lack of clear and detailed indicators. This lack of clear indicators on which to measure the focus and mode dimensions made the research to measure those dimensions indirectly as explained in section 4.2 and 4.3. The new framework proposed some competencies on which indicators could be based. The teachers were asked through the questionnaire to rate them on a Likert scale consisting of Very necessary,
Necessary, and Not Necessary. The following results were got from 21 teachers who answered the question.
Table 5-2:Ranking of the proposed competencies and indicators by teachers.
Code
Number of Teachers
Very Necessary
3
11
Necessary
2
6
Not Necessary
1
4
TOTALS
21
The responses showed that 52% of the teachers considered the competencies and indicators proposed in the new framework were Very necessary, 29% as Necessary while 19% considered them Not necessary as shown by figure 5-3 below.
56
AVERAGE RESPONSE TO PROPOSED INDICATORS
19%
Very Necessary
Necessary
Not Necessary
52%
29%
Figure 5-3:Average response to the proposed competencies and indicators for the proposed evaluation framework.
5.3.2 Development Context
Best practices in ICT integration into education points to the guiding principles recommended by international bodies. These best practices and guidelines can be adapted to meet the specific needs of every country. Bodies like UNESCO (2002), InfoDev (2005) and the
Society for Information and Teacher Education SITE (2002) have recommended some guidelines to be followed when implementing ICT in teacher education. Summed up, indicators of good ICT uses in teacher education that are set up at the national level include:
1. ICT policy through which the government articulates her levels of support and commitment towards ICT implementation at institutional levels.
2. ICT infrastructure which enables connectivity to the Internet.
3. ICT curriculum to guide the application of ICT in education.
These factors have a direct and indirect effect on computer use at the institutional levels.
5.3.3 Computer Use
This defines the quantity of computer use as a proportion of the available learning time.
Twinning (2002) provides a complete definition of the quantity of computer use as follows:
1. The dimension is concerned with the proportion of the school day during which one or more computers are in use by students or teachers.
57
2. The school day is taken to mean the time when students are in school and includes play times, lunch times, but not after-school clubs.
3. The number of students using a computer is irrelevant.
4. The number of computers in use is irrelevant.
In this new framework, the learning time includes all the eight hours students are in school.
Given a tight schedule for lessons in PTTCs, students only make heavy use of computers during the breaks within the learning time.
5.3.4 Focus of Use
The focus of use explores what the computers are used for. The dimension deals with the objectives underlying the computer use (Twining, 2002). This dimension is subdivided into four parts in the proposed framework.
1. IT Skills – Using computers to help students acquire computer skills. This is mainly restricted to the understanding of computer hardware and software.
2. Learning Tool – Students using computers to support any aspect of their learning other than IT itself. Students applying IT in classroom activities and assignments
(Auerswald & Magambo, n.d)
3. Teaching Tool – Focus is on how teachers use computers to create better teaching and learning environments.
4. Other – The use of computers for other purposes that excludes IT skills, teaching, and learning. This includes objectives that do not relate directly to learning and teaching outcomes. 5.3.5
ICT in Teacher Education Competencies
This section of the framework identifies categories of competencies that teachers and students should have in order to use ICT effectively. These competencies are in line with the SITE
(2002) basic principles for development of effective ICT teacher education. These are:
1. Technology should be infused into the entire teacher education program. Students should learn about and with technology and how to incorporate it into their own teaching. 2. Technology should be introduced in context. Pre-service students should learn many uses of technology because they are integrated into their coursework and field experiences. Teacher educators, content specialists, and mentor teachers should expose the pre-service teachers to regular and pervasive modeling of technology and provide opportunities for them to teach with technology.
3. Students should experience innovative technology-supported learning environments in their teacher education programs.
58
This section uses information from the following document
1. Information and Communication Technologies in Teacher Education : A planning guide (2002)
2. Department of Education and Science in England (1989)
3. Teacher Training Agency (2001)
4. Primary Teacher Education Syllabus (K.I.E)
5.3.4.1 ICT Usage Skills
The term ICT Usage Skills is used here more broadly to include not only learning about computer software and hardware but also their application.
In the proposed framework, ICT usage skills support all the areas of technology use in teacher education. This approach is taken because technology should pervade the entire teacher education programme (SITE, 2000). Indicators for evaluation in ICT usage skills can be developed around the following two areas.
1. Demonstration of introductory knowledge, skills and understanding of concepts related to technology.
2. Demonstration of continual growth in technology, knowledge and skills to stay abreast of current and emerging technologies.
5.3.4.2 Content and Pedagogy
Content and Pedagogy can further be divided into three areas mainly to ease the development of indicators.
a) Planning and Designing Learning environments
Teachers should be able to plan and design learning platforms that are supported by technology that include:
1. Design appropriate learning opportunities that apply technology to support diverse needs of learners.
2. Apply current research on teaching and learning with technology when planning learning environments.
3. Identify and locate technology resources and evaluate their potential value in classroom use and sustainability.
4. Plan for the management of the technology resources within the context of learning.
5. Plan strategies to manage student learning in technology enhanced context.
59
b) Teaching, Learning, and the curriculum.
Indicators in this area can be clustered around the following areas:
1. Use technology to support learner centred strategies that address diverse needs of students. 2. Apply technology to develop students’ higher order skills and creativity.
3. Manage student learning activities in a technology enhanced environment.
c) Assessment and Evaluation
This involves evaluating a teacher’s competence in applying technology to a variety of effective assessment and evaluation.
1. Application of technology in assessing student learning of a subject using a variety of assessment strategies.
2. Using technology resources to collect data, interpret results, and communicate findings to improve instructional practice.
3. Determine students’ appropriate use of technology resources for learning, communication and productivity.
4. Evaluate the ways in which use of ICTs changes the nature of teaching and learning.
5.3.4.3 Collaboration and Networking
Teachers use technology to enhance their productivity and professional practice.
1. Use of technology to engage in on-going professional development and lifelong learning. 2. Using technology to share best practice and reduce bureaucracy.
3. Use technology to collaborate with peers, parents and the larger community in order to nurture student learning.
5.3.4.4 Social and Emerging Issues
Teachers should understand the social, ethical, legal and human issues surrounding the use of
Information and Communication Technologies in schools and apply that understanding in practice. 1. Model and teach legal and ethical practice related to technology use.
2. Apply technology resources to enable and empower learners with diverse backgrounds, characteristics and abilities.
3. Promotion of safe and healthy use of technology resources.
4. Facilitate equitable access to technology resources for all students and teachers.
60
5.3.6 Mode of Computer Use
The mode component of the proposed framework is concerned with the impact that computer use has on the curriculum. The curriculum includes:
1. The content (including but going beyond the explicit curriculum but then also excludes the ICT curriculum)
2. The processes involved in the delivery of the curriculum.
The mode of computer use is divided into three categories: Support, Extend and Transform.
Table 5-3 summarizes the key distinctions between the three modes.
61
Table 5-3: Breakdown of the Mode dimension of Computer Use
Curriculum
Content
(Learning
Mode
Process
(How
Objectives excludes and
but
teaching learning is Summary
conducted)
ICT
objectives)
Same
and
Automated
but More efficient
otherwise essentially without
unchanged.
Support
or
effective
changing content Different but does And/or
Different but does Changes
not
not
require
a
require
computer.
computer.
a content and/or process could
but have been achieved
Extend
in a classroom without a
computer.
Different requires and And/or a Different requires computer.
computer
and Changes a content and/or process and
could not have been achieved
Transform
in a classroom without computer.
62
a
Suggested indicators for the various categories of the mode dimension are summarized in
Table 5-4.
Table 5-4: Suggested Indicators of each aspect of Mode of Computer Use
Mode
Support
Indicator area
1. Using computers to support learning/teaching in other subject areas – Infusion (Anderson and Collins in (Harris, 1999))
2. Using computers to achieve traditional pedagogical goals.(Scott et al, 1992 in (Harris, 1999))
3. Usage of Drill and Skill software (Clement et al, 1993 in
(Harris,1999))
Extend
1. Use of problem solving software and tools to extend and enrich learning (Clement et al, 1993 in (Harris,1999))
2. Promotion of learning/teaching communities - and seeing computers as 'mind-tools ' that can make this possible (Cuban
1993).
3. Does it unlock new attitudes and behaviours, hopefully to be transferred to other learning situations (Hexel et al. 1998)?
Transform
1. Does technology transform knowledge itself (Clock, 2000)
2. Use of Hypermedia/Multimedia to alter what teachers and students can present and how we can represent it (Twining 2001).
3. Is technology "Transforming teaching and learning into an engaging and active process connected to real life" (Cuban 2001
p.14)?
63
CHAPTER 6
6. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
6.1
Introduction
There are a number of evaluation models that can be used in the field of education. These models are aimed at presenting a starting point from which those charged with evaluation activities can proceed. Each of the models lays down general procedural principles and focuses attention on certain unique functions of the model of evaluation. The three dominant modules are:
1. Achievement of desired outcomes: This model calls attention to the following facets of evaluation:
-Examination of goal attainment
-Consideration of the relationship between student achievement and educational objectives -Examination of the relationship between the objectives and the learning experiences. -Examination of the relationship between the actual learning experiences and educational outcomes.
-Determination of the significance of the educational objectives and the adequacy of these objectives for any specific group of learners.
2. Merits of an Entity: This approach stresses the need for determining the merits of a given entity as being central to a curriculum evaluation. The worth of a process is evaluated from:
-Relative efficiency of a process or entity
-Relative cost of the use of an approach or process.
3. The Decision-Oriented Approach: In this approach, an evaluation is worthwhile only if its results affect future action. It is therefore action oriented. It involves a three stage process covering:
-Data collection
-Data Analysis
-Preparation of summary reports
This implementation plan is going to adopt a Three- Phase Decision Oriented Evaluation scheme. 64
6.2
A Three – Phase Implementation Scheme
Figure 6-1:The Implementation Plan
65
CHAPTER 7
7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The study discovered that the quantity of computer use in PTTCs is 14% and it is mainly focused on the learning of ICT skills which takes 75 % of the time computers are used. The study concludes that the reality-rhetoric gap of the impact of ICTs in PTTCS is very big and needs to be bridged. The study recommends that the impact of ICT in PTTCs be evaluated from time to time to ensure that programme objectives are met. There is an urgent need to conduct intensive in-training to all the teachers in the colleges. The curriculum developers should develop local content and make it available to all the training colleges. Several factors have been cited as responsible for low quantity of computer use in colleges. Some of these factors are: attitude towards new technologies, poor management, lack of local content, and shortage of equipment. A lot of research can still be done to establish to which extent these factors affect effective integration of ICTs in teacher education.
66
8. REFERENCES
Alavi, M. & Leidner, D. E 2001, ‘Research Commentary: Technology-mediated learning—A call for greater depth and breadth of research’ Information Systems
Research Vol. 12, no. 1, pp.1-10.
Allan H.K. Yuen, Nancy Law and K.C. Wong 2003, ‘ICT implementation and school leadership: Case studies of ICT integration in teaching and learning’ Journal of
Educational Administration Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 158-170
Auerswald & Magambo, Fostering ICT use in Africa, viewed 27 May 2006, http://www.developmentgateway.org/elearning/highlights/viewHighlight.do~activeHighli ghtId=109021
Bloom, BS 1970, ‘Toward a theory of testing which includes measurement -evaluation – assessment’ in Wittrock, M. C. and Wiley, D. E. (eds), ‘The Evaluation of Instruction’, pp. 25-50. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston in J.C Clift, B.w. Imri. 1980, ‘The
Design of Evaluation for Learning’ Higher Education, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 69-80.
Bullock, C., & Ory, J 2000, ‘Evaluating instructional technology implementation in a higher education environment’ American Journal of Evaluation, Vol.21, No.3, pp.315328.
Cousins, JB., & Earl, L 1992, ‘The case for participatory evaluation’ Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol.4, pp.397-418.
Cloke, C 2000, Planning to use ICT, factors which influence teachers, ESRC ICT &
Pedagogy.
Cuban, L 1993, ‘Computers meet classroom: Classroom wins’ Teachers College Record
Vol.95, No.2, p.185.
Cuban, L 2001, Oversold and Underused: Computers in the Classroom, London: Harvard
University Press.
Draper, S., Brown, M., Henderson, F., & McAteer, E 1996, ‘Integrative evaluation: An emerging role for classroom studies of CAL’, Computers and Education, Vol.26, pp.1-3.
Department of Education and Science in England 1982, Criteria for accreditation course of teacher training, Circular 24/89 DES, London.
67
Ehrmann, SC 1995, What does research tell us about technology and higher learning?
Change, Vol.27, No.2, pp.20-27. viewed 15 October 2003 http://www.learner.org/edtech/rscheval/rightquestion.html Haddad, W.,& Draxler , A (Eds.) 2002), Technologies for education: Potentials,
Parameters, and Prospects, Paris:,Unesco.
Heinecke, W.F., Blasi, L., Milman, N., & Washington, L 1999, New directions in the evaluation of the effectiveness of educational psychology. The secretary’s conference onchnology. Viewed 15 October 2003 http://www.ed.gov/Technology/TechConf/1999/whitepapers.paper8.html[nd] Harris, S 1999, INSET for IT: a review of the literature relating to preparation for and use of IT in schools, Slough: National Foundation for Educational Research.
Hexel, D., De Marcellus, O. and Bernoulli, M 1998, ‘Potentials and constraints of ICT in schools’, Educational Media International Vol.35, No.3, pp.149-156.
Jackson, GA 1990, ‘Evaluating learning technology: Methods, strategies, and examples in higher education’, Journal of Higher Education, Vol.61, No.3, pp.294-311.
KIC, 2006, Kenya Gazette March, 2006, ‘Information and Communications
Technology Guidelines (ICT Policy), Gazette Notice No. 2431’ in ICT strategy brief based on findings of e-readiness survey of higher education institutions in Kenya, 2007.
Kozma,R.B Kozma. 2005, ‘National policies that connect ICT-based Education reform to economic and social development’, Human Technology, Vol. 1, No 2, pp.117-156
Lemke, C. & Coughlin, EC 1998, Technology in American Schools: Seven dimensions for gauging progress- A policy maker’s guide, Santa Monica, CA, Milken Exchange on
Education Technology.
Meoli K. & Waema T, ICT strategy brief based on findings of e-readiness survey of higher education institutions in Kenya, Kenya Education Network, 2007
Ministry of Education 2006, National Information and Communication Technology(ICT) strategy for Education and Training, Government Printer, Nairobi.
68
Ministry of Education, Science and Technology 2005, Sessional Paper No 5 of 2004 on a policy framework for education, training, and research, Government Printer, Nairobi.
Ministry Of Education, Science and Technology 2005, Kenya Education Sector Support
Programme: 2005-2010: Delivering Quality Equitable Education and Training to All
Kenyans, 9 May 2005 Draft.
Owston, RD 1999, Strategies for evaluating Web-based learning. Invited address given to the SIG/Text, Technology, and Learning Strategies at the annual meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, Montreal, April 1999.
Owston, RD. 2000, A meta-evaluation of six case studies of Web-based learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New
Orleans, 2000.
Stake, RE 1978, Program evaluation, particularly responsive. Kalamazoo: Western
Michigan University.
Scriven, M 1967, Methodology of evaluation in R. Tyler, R. Gagn, & M. Scriven (Eds.),
Perspectives of curriculume valuation, Chicago, Rand McNally, pp. 39-83
Teacher Training Agency 2001, The use of ICT in subject teaching – Expected outcomes of the New opportunities Fund ICT training initiative for teachers in England, Wales and
Nothern Ireland. Teacher Training Agency: London, viewed 15 February 2002. http://www.webct.com Twining P 2002, Conceptualizing Computer Use in Education: introducing the Computer
Use Framework, British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 28, No.
Twining, P 2001, E211 Learning Matters: Challenges of the Information Age - Software
Guide, Milton Keynes: The Open University.
United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization [UNESCO] 2002, Open and Distance Learning: Trends, policy, and strategy considerations,Paris, Unesco.
United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) 2000, The
Dakar framework for action, Viewed October 2005 http://www.unesco.org/education/efa/ed_for_all/dakfram_eng.shtml 69
Unwin, T 2004, ‘Towards a framework for the use of ICT in Teacher Training in Africa’,
The Journal of Open and Distance Education, Special Issue on Open Learning in Less
Developed Countries, pg.8
Windschitl, M 1998, ‘The WWW and classroom research: What path should we take?’
Educational Researcher, Vol.27, No.1, pp.28-33.
World Bank 2004, Monitoring and Evaluation: Some tools, methods, and approaches.
Washington, D.C. World Bank Group. http://www.worldbank.org/oed/ecd[n.d]
Young, JW 2002), Evaluating the impact of technology in college courses. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New
Orleans, 2002.
70
9. APPENDICES
9.1
Request Letter to Students
John Otieno Oredo,
Strathmore School,
P.o Box 25095,
Nairobi.
00603. joredo@strathmore.ac.ke ___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
Dear Sir/Madam,
Re: Research Questionnaire
I am a Masters of Information Technology student at Strathmore University specializing in Information Systems Management. Professionally, I am a teacher of
Computer Studies and Mathematics at Strathmore School. My research project is
‘Using CPF to Evaluate the Impact of ICT Investment in Education’ taking the case of
Primary Teacher Training Colleges.
In order to gather data for the research, I have prepared a questionnaire to be filled by the student teachers. I kindly request your assistance in this academic endeavour by filling in the questionnaire. I assure you that the data collected here will be held in confidentiality. Thanks in advance.
Regards
John Otieno Oredo
71
9.2
Request Letter to Teachers
John Otieno Oredo,
Strathmore School,
P.o Box 25095,
Nairobi.
00603. joredo@strathmore.ac.ke ___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
Dear Sir/Madam,
Re: Research Questionnaire
I am a Masters of Information Technology student at Strathmore University specializing in Information Systems Management. Professionally, I am a teacher of
Computer Studies and Mathematics at Strathmore School. My research project is
‘Using CPF to Evaluate the Impact of ICT Investment in Education’ taking the case of
Primary Teacher Training Colleges.
In order to gather data for the research, I have prepared a questionnaire to be filled by the teacher educators. I kindly request your assistance in this academic endeavour by filling in the questionnaire. I would like to emphasize that your responses are extremely valuable to me and I would greatly appreciate your answering all questions.
I assure you as a professional colleague, that the data collected here will be held in confidence. Thanks in advance.
Regards
John Otieno Oredo
72
9.3
Questionnaire for Teachers
TEACHERS QUESTIONNAIRE
1.
College Code: -------------------------------------
2.
What is your gender?
Female
3.
Male
How old are you?
Under 30 years
30 – 50 years
Over 50 years
4.
What are your qualifications, and please indicate specialization?( Check all that apply)
PhD:
Masters:
Diploma:
Certificate:
5.
Degree:
Others:
How many years have you been in a teaching position or role?
…………………………………………………………………………………………..
6.
What are your teaching subjects?
…………………………………………………………………………………………..
7.
How many years have you been using computers and related technology?
More than 2yrs but less than 6yrs
Less than 2 yrs
More than 6yrs
73
8.
Please indicate whether you have access to computers and Internet in the following locations
ACCESS
COMPUTERS
Yes
TO ACCESS
INTERNET
No
Yes
TO
No
Institution
Home
Nearest town
Others (Specify)
9.
Where do you use computers in your institution? (Tick all that apply)
In my office
Computer lab
Classroom
10.
Staff room
Library
Other (state):
How many hours per week are the computers available to you?
.............................................................................................................................
11.
How many hours per week is the internet available for you in college?
..............................................................................................................................
12.
Did you receive any ICT training before joining the teaching profession?
Yes
13.
No
How would you rate your level of expertise in computer use?
Tick the applies one
that Level of Expertise
NO EXPERTISE- Can not use computers at all.
FAIR – Able to operate basic computer functions and a word processing application.
GOOD – Able to use Office applications (word processors, spreadsheets, presentation software) for school assignments.
VERY GOOD – All the above skills including use of Internet and Internet resources.
EXCELLENT - all of the above including use of e-mail, Internet surfing and searching; development of web pages; participation in elearning and online classes
74
14. How frequently do you use ICTs for your school work related to the following purposes?
Purpose
Very
Often
Often
- Twice or
- everyday
more week Teaching specific subjects
Learning specific subjects/disciplines
(to stay abreast with emerging professional issues)
Teaching computer skills
Finding and materials accessing
educational
Making presentations/lectures
Preparing lessons
Communicating with students
Communicating with teachers/professionals
other
Communicating with parents
Keeping track of student performance
Preparing reports
Other(state)
75
a
Rarely
Few
times each month
Never
15. tool. State the subject(s) in which you have used ICT as a teaching/learning
…………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………
16.
Is the use of ICT in that subject planned for in the schemes of work?
Yes
17.
No
Did you develop the tool/software?
Yes
18.
No
Do you think ICTs can be used for the purposes below?
NO
YES
Motivate/reward students e.g. give extra computer time as a reward to a student.
As a substitute for teaching
Keep students busy while a teacher does something else
To impress Inspectors, students and other stakeholders 19.
Did you receive any training in ICT in the last 3 years
Yes
No
76
NOT
SURE
20.
What would be your main reason for acquiring further ICT skills?
•
Prestige
•
Change profession
•
It is requirement for promotion
•
Use it in enhancing teaching and learning
•
Start ICT oriented business
•
Other
21. The following are some of the proposed ICT related skills that should be emphasized in teacher education. According to you, how would you rank them in order of relevance to primary teacher education?
I
a
b
II
a
b
c
d
3=Very Necessary, 2=Necessary, 1=Not Necessary (tick in 3 the box)
Demonstrate sound understanding of ICT operations and concepts Demonstrate interest in continual growth of technology knowledge so as to stay abreast of current and emerging technologies Design learning strategies that use ICT to support the diverse needs of learners
Apply current research on teaching and learning with ICT when planning learning environments.
Identify and locate technology resources suitable for meeting learning objectives.
Plan student learning in a technology enhanced context
e Management and care of ICT resources
III a Apply ICT to develop students’ creativity
b Manage student learning in a technology enhanced environment c Facilitate technology enhanced experiences that address content standards and student IT standards
IV a Use technology in assessing student learning of subject matter using a variety of assessment techniques. b Use technology resources to collect and analyze data
77
2
1
V
a Use technology resources to engage in on-going professional development and life-long learning b Use technology to collaborate with peer and stakeholders
c Reflect on professional practice to make informed decisions regarding use of technology for teaching/learning
VI a Identify and use technology resources that affirm diversity
b Promote safe and healthy use of technology resources
c Promote equal access of technology resources for all students
d Model and teach legal and ethical practice related to technology use.
22. Apart from the above mentioned skills, state any other skills that you think are useful for ICT in teacher education.
………………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………………..
23.
Information and Communications Technology in teacher education can be clustered around the four competencies given below. Please rank the competencies in terms of the emphasis given to each in the teacher education program. 1=Really Emphasized.
2= Slightly Emphasized.
3= Not Emphasized.
3
2
1
ICT skills and concepts
Use of ICT in planning, learning, teaching, assessment and evaluation.
Collaboration and networking amongst teaching professionals Social, ethical, legal, and human issues in ICT use
24. In which of the above mentioned competencies do you feel inadequate as a teacher educator?
..........................................................................................................................................
THANK YOU FOR COMPLETING THIS QUESTIONNAIRE
78
9.4
Questionnaire for Students
STUDENTS QUESTIONNAIRE
1.
College Code: -------------------------------------
2.
What is your gender?
Female
3.
Male
You are in which year of study?
First
Second
4.
How many years have you been using computers and related technology?
More than 2yrs but less than 6yrs
Less than 2 yrs
More than 6yrs
4.
Where did you first have encounter with computers?
Here in College
High School
Computer training college
5.
How many hours per week are the computers available to you?
Hours
6.
How many hours per week is the internet available for you in college?
Hours
7.
Where do you use computers in your institution? (Tick all that apply)
Computer lab
Library
Other (state):
Classrooms
79
8.
Apart from the college, where else do you have access to computers?
None
Home
Nearby Cybercafe
9.
How many hours on average per week do you use computers outside the college? Hours
10.
How would you rate your level of expertise in computer use?
Tick the applies one
that Level of Expertise
NO EXPERTISE- Can not use computers at all.
FAIR – Able to operate basic computer functions and a word processing application.
GOOD – Able to use Office applications (word processors, Spreadsheets, presentation software) for school assignments.
VERY GOOD – All the above skills including use of Internet and Internet resources.
EXCELLENT - all of the above including use of e-mail, Internet surfing and searching; development of web pages; participation in e-learning and online classes 11.
How would you rate your skills in the following computer areas?
None
Basic
Intermediate
Word processing Spreadsheets
DTPs
Databases
Presentation tools Internet
Basic repairs and maintenance
80
Proficient
12.
Answer the following questions related to using ICT as a learning tool.
Question a Do you use computers to help you learn other school subjects?
b
Do you use computers to work on projects as groups?
d
Do you think you can learn some of the subjects independently with computers?
e
Does using computers to learn change your attitude toward a subject? f
No
Do you use computers to assist you in preparing assignment reports and presentations?
c
Yes
Do you use the Internet to share knowledge with other students/teachers Do you use any computer software to help you learn on your own?
g
h
i
j
13.
Do you use any form of hypermedia to organize/present what you have learnt to your teachers or classmates?
Do you use computers/Internet to explore legal, ethical and human issues in use of technology?
Have you ever used computers/Internet to gather and organize learning materials on emerging issues like HIV/AIDS, drug abuse, environmental degradation, violence against vulnerable groups etc.
If you use computers to learn other subjects, state the subjects.
…………………………………………………………………………………..
14.
Do you learn ICT in other subjects?
Yes
15.
No
If yes, state some of those subjects.
…………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………..
81
16.
Do you think ICTs can be used for these purposes?
Purpose
NO
YES
NOT
SURE
Motivate/reward students e.g. give extra computer time as a reward to a student.
As a substitute for teaching
Keep students busy while a teacher does something else
To impress Inspectors, students and other stakeholders 17.
What would be your main reason for acquiring further ICT skills?
•
Prestige
•
Change profession
•
It is requirement for promotion
•
Use it in enhancing teaching and learning
•
Start ICT oriented business
•
Other (state):
18. The following are some of the proposed ICT related skills that should be emphasized in teacher education. According to you, how would you rank them in order of relevance to primary teacher education?
I
a
b
II
a
b
c
3=Very Necessary, 2=Necessary, 1=Not Necessary (tick in 3 the box)
Demonstrate sound understanding of ICT operations and concepts Demonstrate interest in continual growth of technology knowledge so as to stay abreast of current and emerging technologies Design learning strategies that use ICT to support the diverse needs of learners
Apply current research on teaching and learning with ICT when planning learning environments.
Identify and locate technology resources suitable for meeting
82
2
1
learning objectives. d Plan student learning in a technology enhanced context
e Management and care of ICT resources
III a Apply ICT to develop students’ creativity
b Manage student learning in a technology enhanced environment c Facilitate technology enhanced experiences that address content standards and student IT standards
IV a Use technology in assessing student learning of subject matter using a variety of assessment techniques. b Use technology resources to collect and analyze data
V
a Use technology resources to engage in on-going professional development and life-long learning b Use technology to collaborate with peer and stakeholders
c Reflect on professional practice to make informed decisions regarding use of technology for teaching/learning
VI a Identify and use technology resources that affirm diversity
b Promote safe and healthy use of technology resources
c Promote equal access of technology resources for all students
d Model and teach legal and ethical practice related to technology use.
83
19.
Information and Communications Technology in teacher education can be clustered around the four below given competencies. Please rank the competencies in terms of the emphasis given to each in the college where you are training. 1=Really Emphasized.
2= Slightly Emphasized.
3= Not Emphasized.
3
2
1
ICT skills and concepts
Use of ICT in Planning, learning, teaching, assessment and evaluation.
Collaboration and networking amongst teaching professionals Social, Ethical, Legal, and Human issues in ICT use 20. In which of the above mentioned competencies do you feel inadequate as a student preparing to become a teacher?
..........................................................................................................................................
………………………………………………………………………………………...
21. Do you think that the current ICT teacher education curriculum will prepare you adequately to handle ICT issues in the school you will be posted?
………………………………………………………………………………………...
22. If your answer the question 21 is NO, what are the additional skills that you think should be included in the curriculum?
………………………………………………………………………………………...
………………………………………………………………………………………...
………………………………………………………………………………………...
THANK YOU FOR COMPLETING THIS QUESTIONNAIRE
84
9.5
Interview Schedule
1. a) How many computers do you have in the college?
b) How many hours would an individual teacher use computers in a week
2. a) Do you have internet connectivity?
b). How many hours would an individual use internet per week?
3. a) How many hours are the computers idle in a week?
b) Why are the computers not in use during those hours?
4. Averagely, what is the level of expertise of the teachers and students?
5. What are some of the tasks the individuals use computers for?
6. Do teachers plan for the use of ICTs in their schemes of work?
7. Has there been any ICT training for teachers in the last three years?
8. What skills do you think teachers should have to enable them integrate ICT in teaching and learning?
9. According to you, why is the quantity of computer use such low?
10. What are some of the policy interventions that can be used to increase the quantity of computer use?
85
9.6
ICT Initiatives and Projects (Kenya Country Report, InfoDev (2007).
Project: The Learning Resource Centre: Offers training in educational management and integration of ICT for school managers, lecturers, and students.
Organisation(s): Kenya Technical Teachers College in Nairobi
Funding source: Flemish Association for Development and Technical Assistance and UNESCO
(during the first year)
Contact: www.vvobkenya.org/sites/LRCVVOB/index.htm
Project: Provision of computers and training: A primary example of the several
NGOs with similar goals that collaborate under the NICE umbrella.
Organisation(s): Computers in Schools
Funding source: Multiple partners and sources (see list on Web site).
Contact: www.cfsk.org/home.htm
Project: ICT equipment for schools: Computers purchased for 142 schools in support of the ICT in
Education Strategy.
Organisation(s): Kenya ICT Trust Fund
Funding source: Ministry of Education
Contact: www.education.go.ke/ICTFund.htm
Project: Mukuru ICT Centre: ICT skill development for under-privileged youth opened as part of
9
the Mukuru Promotion Centre in Nairobi run by the Sisters of Mercy.
Organisation(s): Corporate consortia led by British Airways
Funding source: British Airways, Microsoft, Cisco, and others.
Contact:
www.education.go.ke/ICTFORUM/ICT%20in%20Africa%20&%20Mukuru%20%20Mrs.%20Mary%20Barry.pdf
Project: Development of Learning Content: digitisation of curriculum content for delivery in schools. Organisation(s): Kenya Institute of Education
Funding source: Ministry of Education
Contact: www.kie.go.ke/
Project: Support Centres: Central and regional centres provide immediate solutions on ICT issues to schools via telephone or online inquiries.
Organisation(s): Ministry of Education
Funding source: Microsoft and the ICT Trust Fund
Contact: www.education.go.ke/Speeches/MN_ICT_Strategy_2August2006.html
86
Project: Sponsored Schools: The introduction of computers and distance learning to supplement teaching and improve learning methods in Aga Khan schools in Kenya.
Organisation(s): Aga Khan Education Services
Funding source: Aga Khan Foundation
Contact: Aga Khan Foundation 's education activities, www.akdn.org/agency/akf_concerns.html#education. Project: Internet cafés: More than 400 Internet cafés have been opened in urban and rural areas where there is electricity.
Organisation(s): Telcolm Kenya
Funding source: Telcolm Kenya
Contact:
Dr.
Speranza
Ndege, www.elearningafrica.com/newsportal/english/news19.php Project: NEPAD e-Schools Initiative: Multi-partner demo project that equipped six secondary schools with state-of-the-art ICTs and provided teacher training and learning content. Organisation(s): e-Africa Commission, Ministry of Education, and two consortia led by Oracle and Microsoft
Funding source: Oracle, Microsoft, and the Ministry of Education
Contact: www.eafricacommission.org/docs/NEPAD%20eSCHOOLS%20DEMO%20OVERVIEW.pdf
Project: Agricultural Non-formal Education: A farmers’ resource centre in
Mwingi district that functions as a community information supermarket is equipped with a computer, a
WorldSpace
radio, a digital data adapter, a printer, a mobile phone, and several informational
CDs.
Organisation(s): Arid Lands Information Network-Eastern Africa (NGO) and the
Ministry of
Agriculture
Funding source: FORD Foundation, NOVIB, DFID, and OXFAM-GB
Contact: www.alin.or.ke/about/who.asp
Project: Computer Skill Development: A free e-learning programme in computer skills for youth living in the slum areas of Nairobi.
10
Organisation(s): Nairobits, an NGO run by local staff
Funding source: Dutch and Irish computer experts
Contact: www.developments.org.uk/data/Issue22/e-for-education.htm
Project: KENET Initiative: An initiative that will establish permanent high-speed
Internet
infrastructure in 22 institutions in the next 12 months; establish or improve node infrastructure 87
within each strategic institution; connect 30 tertiary institutions to the backbone within two years; and expand to 600 secondary and primary schools within two years.
Organisation(s): KENET
Funding source: Ministry of Education, ICT Trust Fund
Contact: www.kenet.or.ke/about/index.php?yah=mission&yeh=objectives
Project: Crossing Borders – East, West, Southern Africa and Central Africa: A cross-cultural distance learning scheme linking young African writers to experienced UK mentors. Organisation(s): Lancaster University
Funding source: British Council
Contact: www.crossingborders-africanwriting.org/about/
Project: School Broadcasting: After a successful one-year pilot, there is now a plan to revive
Kenya’s nationwide school broadcast service, using WorldSpace technology to broadcast educational content to 11 million students in 18,000 primary and 3,000 secondary schools by the end of 2006.
Organisation(s): Kenya Institute of Education (KIE) and WorldSpace
Funding source: WorldSpace Incorporated
Contact: www.itu.int/partners/project.asp?lang=en&id=58
Project: The AVOIR Project: A collaboration among 14 universities to produce educational software while at the same time building software design, development, and support capacity in the higher education sector.
Organisation(s): University of Nairobi and Jomo Kenyatta University of
Agriculture and
Technology
Funding source: IDRC, Department of Science and Technology (South Africa),
UNESCO,
Carnegie Corporation, USAID, Sun Microsystems, International Oceanographic
Data and
Information Exchange
Contact:
http://avoir.uwc.ac.za/avoir/index.php?module=cms&action=viewsection&id=gen
12Srv48Nme
23_2
Project: Free Software Licenses: Microsoft Corporation is providing free access to its operating software for schools and higher education institutions in order to reduce the cost of buying and using computers. The company will work with the organisations involved in supplying computers to
88
the institutions to install the software on the machines.
Organisation(s) : Microsoft and the Ministry of Education
Funding Source: Microsoft
Contact: ICT Director, Ministry of Education, Kenya
89
9.7
Pictures
Picture 9-1: Students using computers in one of the Primary Teacher Training Colleges
90
Picture 9-2:A typical computer laboratory in a Primary Teacher College
91
Picture 9-3:This computer laboratory in one of the Primary Teacher Training Colleges has
Internet connection through a Pre-paid ADSL provided by Telcom Kenya
92
References: pp. 25-50. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston in J.C Clift, B.w. Imri. 1980, ‘The Design of Evaluation for Learning’ Higher Education, Vol Haddad, W.,& Draxler , A (Eds.) 2002), Technologies for education: Potentials, Parameters, and Prospects, Paris:,Unesco. KIC, 2006, Kenya Gazette March, 2006, ‘Information and Communications Technology Guidelines (ICT Policy), Gazette Notice No based on findings of e-readiness survey of higher education institutions in Kenya, 2007. Kozma,R.B Kozma. 2005, ‘National policies that connect ICT-based Education reform to economic and social development’, Human Technology, Vol Meoli K. & Waema T, ICT strategy brief based on findings of e-readiness survey of higher education institutions in Kenya, Kenya Education Network, 2007 Owston, RD. 2000, A meta-evaluation of six case studies of Web-based learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, 2000.
You May Also Find These Documents Helpful
-
I hereby certify that the work I have submitted for this assignment is entirely my own.…
- 1150 Words
- 6 Pages
Good Essays -
I certify that the writing in this assignment is my individual work and is my intellectual property. It does not contain the ideas or writing of other individuals/authors.…
- 433 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
I certify that the writing in this assignment is my individual work and is my intellectual property. It does not contain the ideas or writing of other individuals/authors.…
- 511 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
“I certify that the attached work is entirely my own (or, where submitted to meet the requirements of an approved group assignment, is the work of the group), except where material quoted or paraphrased is acknowledged in the text. I also declare that it has not been submitted for assessment in any other unit or course.”…
- 671 Words
- 4 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
I certify that the work submitted for this assignment is my own and research sources are fully…
- 1118 Words
- 8 Pages
Good Essays -
I certify that the coursework that I have submitted is my own unaided work and that I have read and complied…
- 5437 Words
- 16 Pages
Powerful Essays -
CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY: I certify that the attached paper, which was produced for the class identified above, is my original work and has not previously been submitted by me or by anyone else for any class. I further declare that I have cited all sources from which I used language, ideas and information, whether quoted verbatim or paraphrased, and that any and all assistance of any kind, which I received while producing this paper, has been acknowledged in the References section. This paper includes no trademarked material, logos, or images from the Internet, which I do not have written permission to include. I further agree that my name typed on the line below is intended to have, and shall have the same validity as my handwritten signature.…
- 594 Words
- 3 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
I certify that the work submitted for this assignment is my own. I have clearly referenced any sources used in the work. I understand that false…
- 1280 Words
- 7 Pages
Powerful Essays -
I certify that the work submitted for this assignment is my own and research sources are fully…
- 4478 Words
- 23 Pages
Powerful Essays -
CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY: I certify that the attached paper, which was produced for the class identified above, is my original work and has not previously been submitted by me or by anyone else for any class. I further declare that I have cited all sources from which I used language, ideas and information, whether quoted verbatim or paraphrased, and that any and all assistance of any kind, which I received while producing this paper, has been acknowledged in the References section. This paper includes no trademarked material, logos, or images from the Internet, which I do not have written permission to include. I further agree that my name typed on the line below is intended to have, and shall have the same validity as my handwritten signature.…
- 1465 Words
- 6 Pages
Powerful Essays -
I, [type your full first names and surname here], declare that the contents of this dissertation/thesis represent my own unaided work, and that the dissertation/thesis has not previously been submitted for academic examination towards any qualification. Furthermore, it represents my own opinions and not necessarily those of the University.…
- 8716 Words
- 35 Pages
Good Essays -
I hereby certify that I am the sole author of this paper and that no part of this paper…
- 2747 Words
- 15 Pages
Powerful Essays -
I am highly thankful to for giving me an opportunity to work on this project which has provided me valuable information.…
- 1828 Words
- 8 Pages
Good Essays -
I would like to sincerely and profusely thank ____________________ for the valuable guidance, advice and for giving useful suggestions and relevant ideas that facilitate an easy and early completion of this project.…
- 543 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
I hereby certify that this dissertation is an offshoot of the research work undertaken and…
- 8327 Words
- 34 Pages
Good Essays