Masters Thesis

Possibility of Asynchronous e-Learning for
Teacher Training – a Case for Malawi.

A thesis submitted for the degree ofMaster of Instructional Systems (Educational Technology)
To theGraduate School of Instructional Systems
Graduate School of Social and Cultural Sciences
Kumamoto University, Japan.
096g8810
Stanley Daniel Adamson Kwerengwe

Author email: stankwerengwe@yahoo.com
Supervisor:
Professor Fujio Ohmori

Date: 11th February, 2010i

Acknowledgements
An effort as far-reaching as that taken on by the author could not have been possible
without the invaluable assistance of many talented individuals. Mr. Austin Phiri, Mr. Staliko
Chibwe and Mr. Ezekiel Kachisa provided continuous advice, support, and thoughtful
expert review throughout the development and production of the e-Learning instructional
material.

In addition, I wish to acknowledge the tremendous efforts of several others:

Web site expert, Mr. Kogure.
Dr. Tokumura Tomoaki for his technical advice and assistance on installing the e-Learning
system and uploading the instructional material to web servers.

Mr. H. Kachale, Principal, Kasungu Teachers Training College, for his permission to use
the students and facilities at his institution.

Professor Fujio Ohmori provided academic advice and support during the design anddevelopment of a research proposal paper, as well as before, during and after all research
activities. Professor Katsuaki Suzuki and Dr. Junko Nemoto provided very useful comments
about the draft copy of this thesis.

JICA Okinawa for their financial assistance towards the author’s education.

Finally, the author is deeply grateful to all Kasungu Teacher Training College IPTE 5
teacher trainees that participated in the one and half month-long online studies, meetings,
and proceedings; provided me with live and online testimony which assisted me indeveloping this comprehensive report.

ii

Abstract
The main purpose of this study was to investigate and examine the possibility ofasynchronous e-Learning and its effectiveness for teacher training programs in Malawi. The
research also focused on the benefits and limitations of asynchronous e-Learning in Malawi
Teacher Training Colleges and if e-mails and forum facilities (asynchronous discussion
board) would be a fair substitute for face to face interaction in Malawian setting. Hence,
asynchronous e-Learning was studied and examined. In this study, 60 randomly selected
pre-service teacher trainees were given an online Mathematics instructional material to
study on their own without the assistance of an instructor. To have a complete study, threephases of formative evaluation, namely: one on one, small group and field trial phases,
were implemented. The field trial phase was where the instructional material was put on afull implementation stage.

The study was carried out through online questionnaire surveys and face to face interviews
with the subjects. Observations and participants’ reports about asynchronous e-Learning
were also part of data collection (refer to Appendices 13, 14, and 15). All these datacollection instruments enabled the researcher to obtain the participants’ impressions andsatisfactions about asynchronous e-Learning, that is, participants were allowed to study thecourse online and consequently asked to give their views on the effectiveness of both thecourse and the asynchronous e-Learning mode of delivery.

During the research activities, all participants took a pretest, a midcourse test and a
posttest for quantitative data collection. The research compared participants’ tests (pretest,
midcourse, and posttest) grade results in classes that were taught by the same instructor(the researcher) using face-to-face and online delivery modes. An analysis of differences inaverage net gains between pretest and posttest average grades was used to determine if asignificant difference existed between the two modes of delivery. This also measured
participants’ learning achievements.

iii

Each learning unit in the asynchronous e-Learning instructional material had a set ofquestions which the participants were required to discuss through use of emails and a
discussion board on Friendster bulletin board. This assisted in promoting and improving
two way communications between and among participants. A discussion of online learners
in relation to their satisfaction, asynchronous e-Learning effectiveness and facultysatisfaction has been presented in the following chapters below.

Currently, Malawi is using face-to-face mode of delivery to train her elementary school preservice teachers. Although the Malawian education system is encouraging and promoting
learner centred education (Kachisa, 2006), teacher centred education is overshadowing thelearner centredness philosophy. Classes are almost and traditionally devoid of active
student-student or student-instructor communication. In addition to this problem, Malawi is
failing to produce enough elementary school pre-service teachers through the conventional
face to face mode of delivery to meet the ever growing enrolment of pupils in theelementary schools. This is largely due to inadequate classroom blocks in each teacher
training college. There are only five teacher training colleges in Malawi. Each college has acapacity of 500 students. Hence, the need for asynchronous e-Learning as a means ofpromoting learner-centred education, improving learner-learner or learner-instructor
communication during the learning process and increasing capacity for each college toenroll more teacher trainees than the case is as of now.

Both a descriptive and quasi experimental research designs were employed because datacollection methods involved observations, interviewing of and giving tests to both face toface and online participants. The quasi-experimental design was used for the purposes ofmeasuring and determining the effectiveness of asynchronous e-Learning in terms ofstudents’ performance.

The first stage of this research project had been to analyse and review the current teacher
training Mathematics curriculum. Then, a Mathematics e-Learning instructional materialiv

was designed and developed. Later, it was tested, evaluated, revised (ADDIE Model in
Suzuki, 2004) and then used by a large group of participants.

A total number of 100 randomly selected teacher trainees (subjects) participated in thisresearch. These were selected from one (out of five) teacher training colleges in Malawi.
The data collected was organized, processed and then analysed to draw conclusions.

The research findings revealed strong support and approval for asynchronous e-Learning
as being effective in teacher training programs. In other words, the results of the research
has shown that the majority of both students and Mathematics instructors at Kasungu
Teachers Training College hugely positive about the usefulness and overall advantages ofasynchronous e-Learning use in teacher training programs. This was mixed with serious
concerns about the impact of regular black outs, high IT illiteracy rate and slow internet on
self-learners.

In ideal conditions, the research participants needed to be exposed to equal conditions andopportunities such as; equal study time, and other learning resources, but this was not thecase. The online participants had a lot of experimental problems such as power andinternet failures, inadequate computers (10 computers to be shared by 60 participants),
limited study time in the computer laboratories and slow internet. This meant that the face
to face participants had a lot of advantages over online participants in terms of study time,and learning resources. For example, when there was no electricity or internet, face to faceparticipants continued learning yet both groups were supposed to finish at the same time.

Despite the experimental challenges outlined above for online participants, the findings ofthis research show that both online and face to face participants had almost the sameachievements in terms of performance. This demonstrates that there is no significant
difference in learning achievements and performances between asynchronous e-Learningand face to face delivery modes (refer to Appendices 10, 11, and 12). The findings also
indicate that the participants perceived the asynchronous discussion board and emails asv

important tools in the learning process because they promoted situated learning, facilitateda social construction of knowledge, and afforded customized learning experiences.

The evaluation case study has been arrived at based on participants’ performance andperceptions of the impact of asynchronous e-Learning use on student learning andengagement. The research fell under the main themes of Instructional Design andInformation Technology. The uniqueness of this research is that it was the first time in
Malawi to try to find out if asynchronous type of e-Learning could be possible for training
elementary school pre-service teachers. Besides, the participants were real pre-service
teacher trainees unlike in other studies where simulations are used.

vi

Table of Contents
Title page77777777777777777777777777777777777.i

Acknowledgements777777777777777777777777777777.ii

Abstract 77777777777777777777777777777777777.iii

1. Background and Purpose of This Research................. 7777777777777.1

1.1 Introduction==================..................................................1

1.2 Asynchronous e-Learning=========================..1

1.3 Why Research on Asynchronous e-Learning==============...==..4

1.4 Why Research not on Asynchronous e-Learning===============..6

1.5 Pre-service teacher training in Malawi=================.===6

1.6 Problems of face-to-face mode of training in Malawi==============.9

1.7 Research Problems===========================..11

2. Literature Review=.=======================..=====13

2.1 Current research on teacher training through asynchronous e-Learning=====.13

2.2 Asynchronous e-Learning and self learning==============..===13vii

3. Research Methods777777777777777777..7777777777..16

3.1 Research Design==============...==============16

3.2 Research Participants=======================..===21

3.3 Instrumentation=======================.======22

3.4 Asynchronous Discussion Board=====================...28

3.5 Procedures===============================.30

4. Data and Analyses77777777777777777777777777777.36

4.1 Types of collected data==.============..===========.36

4.2 Qualitative Data Analysis=======...=================.36

4.3 Quantitative data analysis..=======.======.=====....................62

4.4 Experimental problems during study=====.==============...68

5. Conclusion===..=======================..=====..69

5.1 Summary of findings========================...==.69

5.2 Implications and limitations======.=.==============..==70viii

5.3 Challenges for Malawi with regard to asynchronous e-Learning=======....71

5.4 Future plans for e-Learning in Malawi==============.=====.72

References: 777777777777777777777777.77777777..73

Appendices: 77777777777777777777777777777777..76

ix

Chapter 1
Background and Purposes of this Research
1.1 Introduction
This research was carried out at Kasungu Teachers Training College in Malawi. In Malawi
there are five teachers training colleges where pre-service elementary school teachers aretrained. Kasungu Teachers Training College has a total student capacity of 500 as is thecase with the other four colleges. In Malawi, no e-Learning is done in teacher training
colleges despite the availability of computers and internet connections. Therefore, training
elementary school pre-service teachers through asynchronous e-Learning would be a new
approach and a very big challenge to both the teacher trainees and instructors. In this study,
I intended to investigate and examine if asynchronous e-Learning could be possible anddesirable for teacher training programs in Malawi. I was interested in this research because
it was directly related to my job. My job is to train pre-service elementary school teachers inScience and Mathematics. I am very sure that the results of the research will be very useful
to me as an individual, my institution as well as the whole country in determining the way
forward in the area of teacher training through asynchronous e-Learning.

1.2 Asynchronous e-Learning
Asynchronous e-Learning occurs when the teacher and the learner interact in different
places and during different times. Asynchronous e-Learning lets people learn at anytime. It
is thus a key component of flexible e-Learning. Students enrolled in asynchronous courses
are able to complete their work whenever they please. Asynchronous e-Learning often
relies on technology such as message boards, emails, pre-recorded video lectures,
threaded discussion boards, e.t.c. Asynchronous e-Learning, commonly facilitated by email and discussion boards, supports work relations among learners and with teachers,
even

when

participantscannotbeonline

at

the

same

time

(Erkan,2006).

Often, asynchronous e-Learning is preferred by students with complicated schedules
because of their asynchronous nature, combining education with work, family, and othercommitments. For instance, some pre-service teacher trainees in this study indicated in1their pre-treatment survey that they left their previous jobs in order to receive basic
pedagogical training; others indicated they had family commitments (as parents,
wives/husbands). Asynchronous e-learning makes it possible for learners to log on to an eLearning environment at any time and download documents or send messages to teachersor peers (Erkan, 2006). Students may spend more time refining their contributions, which
are generally considered more thoughtful compared to synchronous communication.

For a successful asynchronous e-Learning, there is need to institute a discussion forum,
also known as a bulletin board. A discussion forum is a collection of conversations that
occur over time. A discussion group might start out as a question from an individual
creating a thread. Some time later, another individual responds to that question. Others can
respond to the question or they can start their own conversation (forming another thread). A
threaded discussion might also start with a teacher asking an open-ended question that
leads to a class discussion. Discussion groups can be used to support a group of people
taking the same class or can be used to support people performing similar tasks. Distinctive
features of asynchronous e-Learning are:•

Intermittent access to or interaction with the instructional material, fellow learners
and the instructor.

•

Self-paced•

Individual, or intermittently collaborative•

Independent learning•

Usually available any time•

Recorded or pre-produced (Erkan, 2006).

Asynchronous e-Learning tends to work well for self-motivated learners who do not needdirect guidance to complete their assignments. A major benefit of students studying throughasynchronous e-Learning is the promotion of learner independence and autonomy while
also challenging them to experience and learn using technology. A Friendster
asynchronous bulletin board was implemented in this study. Emails were also used.
Johnson (2006) in Ajayi (2009) argues that students experience learning events2

independently when they use asynchronous discussion board because each learner canwork at his or her own pace.

As opposed to asynchronous e-Learning, synchronous learning is live, real-time (andusually scheduled), facilitated instruction and learning- oriented interaction. It isdistinguished from self-paced asynchronous learning, which students access intermittently
on demand (Erkan, 2006). Synchronous e-Learning, commonly supported by media suchas videoconferencing and online chat, has the potential to support e-learners in thedevelopment of learning communities. It goes by a variety of names: virtual classrooms,
Web conferences, Webinars, and online presentations, to list just a few of them (Erkan,2006). A virtual classroom duplicates the capabilities found in a real classroom. A virtual
classroom thus provides:•

A place to meet: Students and teachers use their computers to go to a virtual
meeting place instead of a classroom.

•

Take attendance: A list of students is recorded.

•

Lecture: Teachers can choose from a variety of synchronous technologies including:•oSlide presentationo

Audio and video conferencingoApplication sharingoShared whiteboard

Interaction with students: Students can indicate when they want to speak by
virtually raising their hand. Teachers can let students speak through audio and videoconferencing. Teachers and students can use instant messaging and chat.

Learners and teachers experience synchronous e-Learning as more social and avoid
frustration by asking and answering questions in real time. Synchronous sessions help elearners feel like participants rather than isolates. Synchronous e-Learning lets teachers
conduct classes over the Internet. The use of Web conferencing software supports live,
more or less interactive learning events delivered on the World Wide Web. Common
features of synchronous e-Learning are:3•Real-time

•

Live

•

Usually scheduled and time-specific (but can be impromptu)•

Collective and often collaborative•

Simultaneous virtual presence (with other learners and facilitators or instructors)•

Concurrent learning with others (Hrastinski, 2008)

In this study, participants were exposed to a Mathematics asynchronous e-Learning course
which was supposed to be covered in about 15 hours. The instructional material was
similar (in content, pictures, diagrams, tests, quizzes) to the one offered through face toface in pre-service teacher training programs. However, the difference was that the eLearning instructional material had both audio and video clips. Before full implementation of
the e-Learning course, one to one and small group formative evaluations were carried out
so as to improve the quality and effectiveness of the instructional material (Suzuki, 2002).
The e-Learning instructional material had quizzes for practice, pictures, diagrams andvideos for clarification of new concepts. All participants took an entry test, a pretest, a midcourse test and a posttest.

1.3 Why Research on Asynchronous e-Learning
Asynchronous e-Learning was chosen in this study basing on the following reasons: its
interactivity elements, it can be implemented using a number of options such as emails,
voice mails, CD ROMs, etc., and the Malawian learner’s characteristics such as slow typing
speed, IT illiterate, large numbers of learners, etc. Another reason is that despite theMalawian education system encouraging and promoting learner centred education, teacher
centred education has been and is still overshadowing the learner centredness philosophy.
Classes are almost and traditionally devoid of active student-student or student-instructor
communication. Large classes further compound the difficulty of engaging students andenabling viable student-instructor or student-student feedback. It is argued that learning
afforded by new technologies is increasingly becoming important in pre-service teacher
education (Schellens & Valcke, 2006, in Ajayi, 2009). Therefore, Malawi needs to move4

forward technologically in training its school pre-service teachers. The sociocultural theoryof learning posits that learning is interactive, discursive, technology-mediated, and situated(Ajayi, 2009). Gee 2003, in Ajayi 2009, extends this perspective to suggest that humanlearning is fully embedded in (situated within) a material, social, and cultural world and thatthe affordances of tools and technologies (e.g. computer and the Internet) can enhancelearning.

Table 1 below shows some of the factors which were used to consider whether
asynchronous type of e-Learning would be possible and desirable for teacher training in
Malawi.

Table 1: Factors that were considered in choosing asynchronous type of e-Learning.
criterion
who
who
what
when
where
How

question
Learner’s level of autonomy
Learners typing ability
Learners need to learn
Learners are available
Learners are locatedLearners prefer to learn or
instructor prefer to teachasynchronous
Learners are autonomous
If learners do not type well
Learners have diverse needs
At various times
Located in diverse places
Discovering new information andprogressing at their own pace

How many

Number of learners

Large numbers

In summary, learning to teach requires a new way of learning by pre-service teachers. This
new way requires teacher educators to use technology to engage pre-service teacher
trainees in learning (Schellens et al. 2005 in Ajayi, 2009). It also requires pre-service
teacher trainees to construct knowledge through active participation in discussions andknowledge sharing with their peers (Schellens et al. 2005). Schellens et al. (2005) in Ajayi(2009) aptly argue that an asynchronous discussion board facilitates active engagement inlearning processes as students collaboratively work on a learning task, and by mutually
explaining the learning content, giving feedback to other group members, asking andanswering questions. In this way, the dialogue they engage in (through the use of
discussion board) provides an understanding of the nexus between how students5understand a phenomenon belonging to a learning task and what they actually do inundertaking the task (Johnson, 2007 in Ajayi, 2009).

1.4 Why Research Not on Synchronous e-Learning
Synchronous e-learning was not chosen in this research based on the following factors:
resource limitations- all participants had very slow typing speed since they were beginners
in the use of ICT. Therefore, they needed more time to type a question as well as
responses for posting to their learning mates and/or instructor. This was compounded by
the limited time during which the research was supposed to be conducted. The slowness intyping speed would obviously have a negative impact on participants’ instant messaging aswell as chats. Another problem was that, apart from computers, there would also be needfor other tools such as Skype software, head phones, and cameras to allow for both audio
and video conferencing. Unfortunately, in Malawi, one internet line is usually shared bymany subscribers leading to very slow internet provision with small band width. Therefore,
downloading and using Skype software for purposes of synchronous e-Learning would not
be possible. At the same time it was felt that synchronous e-Learning is more demanding
than asynchronous e-Learning both in terms of operation as well as acquiring thenecessary tools for its implementation.

1.5 Pre-service teacher training in Malawi
In Malawi, elementary school pre-service teacher training course commonly known as theInitial Primary Teacher Education (IPTE) or One plus one mode is a two year teacher
training programme and has two components (Chiwaya, M. et.al, 2007). These are college
phase and field phase. Each of these phases is one year long. During the college phase,the pre-service teacher trainees learn about both the elementary school classroom
pedagogy and the content of each respective subject. In this phase no teaching practice isdone.

All trainees spend their time in class with their instructors. It is this part of their studies fromwhich I developed the instructional material. During this phase, all pre-service teacher

6trainees are expected to acquire knowledge and necessary skills which they will use when
preparing and planning lessons. They will also use the knowledge and skills gained at thetime of teaching and assessing their elementary school learners. The teacher trainees go
through continuous assessment which forms part of their final grade. At the end of the year,
all teacher trainees are expected to sit for a national examination based on theoreticalknowledge about classroom pedagogy. 40% of continuous assessment and 60% fromnational examinations results form their final grade (Chiwaya, M. 2007). In Malawi, anaverage mark of 40% is considered a pass for pre-service teacher trainees.

During the field phase, each teacher trainee is attached to an elementary school where
he/she is expected to practise teaching and assessment of pupils in a given class. The
trainee also practises writing of lesson plans and schemes of work which he/she learnt incollege. Each teacher trainee is attached to a mentor, who advises on all matters pertaining
to successful teaching. The mentor is supposed to do some grading of the teachingpractice activities and compiles reports on teacher trainees’ progress. Beside a mentor, theschool head teacher, primary school methods advisors, and college tutors supervise thetrainees. At the end of the year, the teaching practice is moderated by Malawi Ministry of
Education and Malawi National Examinations Board. During the moderation exercise,sampled teacher trainees have their lessons observed and graded. This is done as a proofof thorough and proper preparation of the teacher trainees. Finally, all teacher trainees’
grades are compiled and submitted to the national examinations body by the college
assessment committee. A teacher trainee who passes the teaching practice is certified toteach elementary school children and consequently given a teaching job by the Malawi
Ministry of Education.

Of late, Malawi has been changing its systems of training elementary school teachers due
to limited capacity for provision of quality pre-service and in-service teacher training(Chiwaya, M. et.al, 2007). For example, there has been teacher training programs like theMalawi Integrated In-service Teacher Education Project (MIITEP), Secondary School
Teacher Education Project (SSTEP), one year program, One plus one mode of training, etc.

7

Under the MIITEP project, pre-service teacher trainees got initial training about teachingskills for about two weeks. Then they were sent to elementary schools to start teaching.
The program proved a failure as there was a public outcry that education standards went
down since the teachers could not deliver as expected. As for the SSTEP project,elementary school teachers with some teaching experience were recruited to undergo a
training course through paper based distance education leading to an award of a Diplomain Education. This project succeeded. However, few students get recruited every year
because only one college is involved in this program. The one year program was thought tobe an improvement of the MIITEP project. Under this system, the government recruited
pre-service teacher trainees, allocated them to elementary schools to teach for some years
before they got training and then sent them to teacher training colleges for a one year
training course. Again this program did not work as the public complained against it.

Finally, the government started a new project called the one plus one mode of training,
also known as Initial Primary Teacher Education (IPTE). Under this program, thegovernment recruits pre-service teacher trainees, and send them to teacher training
colleges for one year for pedagogical skills. In the second year of training, the pre-service
teachers are sent to elementary schools for teaching practice. This is the mode of training
which is currently being used. However, the problem with this mode is limited space as all
students have to be accommodated in the colleges. So it is practically impossible to meetthe graduating numbers which the government wants every year.

As a result, theGovernment of Malawi is still looking at ways which will assist in increasing the number ofteacher trainees to be recruited every year to meet the current rising demand of pre-service
teachers in elementary schools. Currently, plans are underway to start paper based
distance education in all teacher training colleges in order to reduce the problem of teacher
shortage in Malawi. Therefore, the implementation of asynchronous e-Learning may greatly
assist the learners due to its high interactivity component as opposed to paper based
distance

education.

Besides,

asynchronous

e-Learning

will

ensuretwowaycommunications between learner and teachers and even among the learners themselves.
This means asynchronous e-Learning will still be important in the event that paper based

8

distance education is implemented. According to Malawi’s education system, teachers aresupposed to follow learners learning progress regardless of the mode of delivery. The
learners are supposed to send assignments, and tasks to their respective colleges. At theend of the year, each learner is supposed to take an examination at the college. With
asynchronous e-Learning in place, it will be easy for both the teachers and learners to carryout their expected roles effectively. Instead of learners going to their respective colleges tosit for an examination, they can simply do it on the computer.

1.6 Problems of face-to-face mode of training in Malawi.
There are many problems which hamper the delivery of quality education through the face
to face mode of delivery. Some of the problems faced are as follows:•

Most of the times reading materials (books, handouts) delay due to some logisticalproblems- each college receives books and other paper based reading materials foran academic year only. Unfortunately, Malawi has little ability and capacity to print
books and other reading materials. As such most paper based reading materials
are printed from outside the country.

•

Frequent instructor movements for other official engagements (e.g. setting andmarking of national examinations, supervising teaching practice for previous preservice teacher trainees, etc.) and duties, - besides teaching, college instructors get
involved in other activities outside their duty stations. During the period when an
instructor is away, the teacher trainees have no lessons till the time when theirinstructor comes back.

•Presence of few classroom blocks and number of teacher training colleges- in
Malawi there are five teacher training colleges only against a population of about 14
000 000. Each college admits and recruits about 500 teacher trainees every year
despite a large number of applicants for the teacher training programs.

•

Big teaching load- many college instructors have many classes to teach due toinadequate staffing. Consequently, continuous assessment is not done as expected.

9•Large classes- in most cases one class will have not less than 50 teacher trainees.
This translates into limited freedom for learners to participate in all class activities.
Two way communications between trainees and their instructor or among thetrainees during lessons is limited.

•

Lack of any solid policy and clear strategic plan for teacher education.

•Less than optimal output from teacher training institutions. [Report produced by
Kairi, (2003),for the Malawi Ministry of Education]

Beginning in 1987, in response to strong growth in elementary school enrolment and to
reduce teacher shortages, the Malawi Ministry of Education, Science and Technology
began experimenting with alternative forms of delivery of primary teacher education inorder to increase trained teacher output from the teacher training colleges [Report written
by Kairi, (2003) for the Malawi Ministry of Education]. Most of the experiments/initiatives onteacher training programs failed as outlined in the previous page. The current system(known as one plus one mode) of teacher training which seems successful has problems of
producing inadequate pre-service teachers every year. Therefore, the Malawi Government
made recommendations as strategies to be addressed in order to meet the demand forprimary school pre-service teachers. Some of the recommendations are the use of
information and communication technology to support delivery of the teacher training
programmes; and lay the foundation for future implementation of ICT in the general school
system. Use of distance education as a modality for delivering both pre-service and inservice education and to assist in meeting the emergency demand for teachers at primarylevel [Report produced by Kairi, (2003) for the Malawi Ministry of Education]. Therefore, myresearch conforms to government’s initiatives and recommendations to try out various waysof training teachers in order to reduce the shortage of pre-service teachers in theelementary school sector. The results of this research can be used to determine whether
asynchronous e-Learning would be one of the possible means of teacher training programs.

101.7 Research problems
In Malawi, teacher training is done through face-to-face only. As a result, there is highdependency by the learners on the few existing teacher trainers in the colleges. This
promotes passive learning with very little or no learner activeness. Classes are almost andtraditionally devoid of active student-student or student-instructor communication. Large
classes further compound the difficulty of engaging students and enabling viable studentinstructor or student-student feedback. Research findings indicate that the constructivist
perspective points to the importance of students creating their own knowledge in an
individual and personal way. This learning theory emphasizes the need for activity andengagement by the student in order for learning to take place (Stephenson, ed., 2001;
Heinich, Molenda, Russell & Smaldino, 2002).

Two other theories also support the importance of student activity and engagement,
although with a slightly different perspective than constructivism. The social-psychologicalapproach emphasizes the importance of learning in a cooperative, learner-centeredenvironment. The cognitivist perspective postulates how the processing of information
occurs. One important part of this processing is assimilation, which results from the active
experiences of the student (Heinich et al., 2002). One way that this activity, deemed vital tolearning based on all the three learning perspectives, takes place is through the interactionof the student with peers and instructor. Thus, the importance of faculty knowing how tofoster this kind of learning in an online environment is essential to the success of the online
learning experience. Hence, the need for asynchronous e-learning in Malawi’s teacher
training programs.

Despite the presence of computers and other e-Learning technologies in the teacher
training colleges, most students and trainers do not see the need for ICT and e-Learning
because of high dependency on printed material. In this study, therefore, I investigated andexamined:•

If asynchronous e-Learning could be possible and desirable for teacher training
programs in Malawi.

11•The effectiveness of asynchronous e-Learning in teacher training programs in
Malawi.

•

The benefits and limitations of asynchronous e-Learning in Malawi’s elementary
school pre-service teacher training programs.

It was expected that the research results would show that:•

Asynchronous e-learning could be possible and suitable type of e-Learning for
Malawi based on factors on the ground, and•Asynchronous e-Learning could be more effective than face-to-face training.

In other words, a learner in asynchronous e-learning can achieve higher grades than inface to face mode. This would be proved by setting the passing mark at 65% for the online
participants rather than the traditional 40% passing mark for face-to-face training. I chose
65% as a passing mark in order to set high standards for e-Learning.

12Chapter 2
Literature Review
The literature on the importance of asynchronous e-Learning in the context of education
reform is growing.

2.1 Current research on teacher training through asynchronous e-learning.
Biesenbach-Lucas (2003) in Ajayi (2009) investigated students’ perceptions of the efficacy
of asynchronous discussion board as a teaching and learning tool in teacher training
courses. His findings were mixed. On one hand, students in the study suggested that
discussion board offers greater social interaction with other class members (BiesenbachLucas, 2003, p. 24) and promote understanding of course content. Conversely, others
noted that asynchronous discussion board fails to provide opportunities for additional
practice. Piskurich, G.M. (2003, p.266), in the American Management Association (AMA)
Handbook of e-Learning, indicates that using asynchronous tools might slow down
collaboration although it does not certainly eliminate it, nor does it eliminate the value thatworking with other people can create. Biesenbach-Lucas (2003) summarizes his findings:“For all students, the two main issues perceived as negative related to their perceptions offorced, unnatural interaction promoted by the asynchronous discussions and lack of topic
prompts, the requirement to make connections to prior postings, and the frequency of
required contributions to discussions”.

2.2 Asynchronous e-Learning and self learning
In this research, more attention has been focused on asynchronous e-Learning. This was
based on the time and resources limitations during research activities. Besides, the natureof pre-service teacher trainees (such as holding many responsibilities) was also taken into
consideration. Malawi recruits and admits teacher trainees whose age range is between 18
to 40 into the training programs. Some of these trainees are married, working class people
and hold various family responsibilities. Tom Kelly in Allison Rossett (2002) observed thatpeople like to argue that e-learning isn’t as effective as classroom teaching. But he argues
that classroom teaching produces only about 25% retention rate in the first ten days, with a13

decline in skill if one doesn’t use it. Kelly adds that research findings show equal or better
retention with e-Learning. Research findings also show that some e-learners have always
troubles with the fact that in e-Learning, all of the instructional material and activities aredelivered and performed online (Allison, 2002). They further indicate that these learners
would have preferred a paper based manual to go along with the online course (Allison,
2002).

The following are the types of interaction in a learning situation: interaction between
participants and learning materials, interaction between participants and instructors/experts,
interaction among participants, and management/feedback communication (Allison, 2002).
Social interaction is a key element in online courses (Allison, 2002). All these threeelements were taken care of during the design and development of the instructional
material for my research.

The inclusion of in text questions, quizzes, tests within the

instructional material promoted interaction between participants and learning material,
whereas the use of the Friendster bulletin board and emails facilitated interaction between
participants and the instructor, and interaction among participants themselves.

Learning is an asynchronous act (Piskurich, 2003). Each one of us learns every dayanytime, anywhere, under a variety of conditions, and with a variety of outcomes. On theother hand, it is also argued that teaching can either be synchronous or asynchronous(Piskurich, 2003), i.e. teaching can occur with groups and individuals, together or apart, allat once, or one at a time. Piskurich (2003) contends that asynchronous e-learning musthave the following four basic elements or building blocks: presentation, elicitation,
evaluation and collaboration. All these basic components were included in the e-Learning
system which was used for this research. Hrastinski (2008) quotes the cognitive model ofmedia choice proposed by Robert and Dennis (2003) which theorises that asynchronous
communication increases a person’s ability to process information. This is because thereceiver has more time to comprehend a message since an immediate answer is notexpected. This is different from synchronous e-Learning where the learner is supposed togive an immediate feedback to a question.

14

Johnson (2006) and Simpson (2006) in Ajayi (2009) observed that asynchronous
discussion board is collaborative and interactive and thus opens new opportunities for preservice teachers to learn how to teach in innovative ways. Also Johnson (2007) andDoering and Beach (2002) contend that technology helps students to construct knowledge.
Fortunately, asynchronous discussion board facilitates new models of teaching andlearning where knowledge is networked in the affordances of people, tools, andtechnologies. In this regard, Gee (2003, 2007) in Ajayi (2009) argues that rather thanteacher-authority, teacher domination, and knowledge transmission that characterize
lecture-based approach to teaching, the use of technology facilitates critical learning,
distributed knowledge, inquisition, discovery, and creativity for learners. In particular,
asynchronous discussion board has the potential to build learning conditions that facilitate
equitable participation for all students irrespective of their gender, ethnicity, language, andsocial-cultural backgrounds (Gee, 2007, 2003). This is one of the reasons why de Smet etal. (2008), Brewer and Klein (2006), van Aalst (2006) and Lim and Cheah (2003) in Ajayi
2009 suggested that there are clear differences between traditional teaching and online
instruction.

Traditional instructional practices tend to be authoritative, linear and knowledge transmitted
while asynchronous e-learning instruction seems to promote active learning, inquisitiveness,
self-directed, self-reflective and analytical learning (Schellens & Valcke, 2006 in Ajayi,2009). Obviously, there is a very big difference in social relations and participatory
structures between traditional instruction and asynchronous e-Learning. For example, while
traditional instruction facilitates competitive, face-to-face, and hierarchical kinds of social
relation, a discussion board and emails in asynchronous e-Learning promotes dialogue,
anonymity, multiple identities, and equality (Gee, 2003). More importantly, the potential of
discussion board to support self-reflection, collaboration, and learning anytime andanywhere (Lim & Cheah, 2003) for pre-service teacher trainees is very important andessential in contemporary conception of teaching and learning.

15

Chapter 3
Research Methods
3.1 Research Design
In this research, both descriptive and quasi experimental designs were employed. The
descriptive design involved semi structured paper based interviews (for one to one
participants only) and online questionnaires with a sample of participants selected
randomly from Kasungu Teacher Training College (refer to Appendix 15). Face to faceinterviews were also conducted. Participants’ reactions and impressions on asynchronous
e-Learning feasibility and effectiveness were measured (refer to Appendix 9) and recorded.
From the reactions, it was possible to determine how well asynchronous e-Learning would
be accepted. Kirkpatrick (1998) observed that measuring reaction helps to ensure
participants’ satisfaction, motivation, and interest in learning. This will also help in deciding
the way forward for asynchronous e-Learning implementation in Malawi teacher training
colleges. The participants were also observed when they were interacting with the eLearning instructional materials to determine their reactions and attitudes.

As for the quasi-experimental design, there was need to investigate if teacher training
through asynchronous e-Learning can be more effective than face-to-face mode. Twogroups of 40 participants each were set up at Kasungu Teacher Training College. One
group went through the usual face-to-face mode of training (control group) and the othergroup was trained through asynchronous e-Learning (experimental group). Figure 1 below
shows a face to face class.

Figure 1: A face to face class16

A pretest, a mid course test and a posttest were administered to both online and face toface learners in order to collect quantitative data (refer to Appendices 3, 5, and 16) The
mid course test and the posttest results had shown how much learning took place (Suzuki,
2004, chapter 3), and hence, determination of the effectiveness of asynchronous e-learning.
The evidence and proof of learning through asynchronous e-Learning was determined byanalyzing and comparing the attainments and average net gains of both the control andexperiment groups after taking the pretest, midcourse test and posttest (Kirkpatrick, 1998).
Both groups (control and experiment) were exposed to the same treatment except for themode of delivery of the instructional material. In other words, all participants were expected
to study the same content and take the same class assignments, and tests.

Katori (2001) in Suzuki (2004) emphasizes the need for an e-Learning community for a
successful e-Learning course. So, the group studying through asynchronous e-Learning
was required to hold online discussions on a set of questions through Friendster bulletinboard and regular emails. They were also allowed to ask questions through the samemeans. Then a questionnaire was given to the online participants for their impressions andopinions about asynchronous e-Learning. Brewer and Klein (2006) investigated the effectof rewards, roles and affiliation motives in asynchronous learning for undergraduate
students. Their findings show that students learn better when the design of anasynchronous discussion board provides an opportunity for students to work collaboratively
and interact through asking and answering questions within groups. In this research,
participants were given an opportunity to ask and respond to questions through emails andthe Friendster discussion board. Schellens and Valcke (2006) examine whether
collaborative learning in asynchronous discussion board enhances learning academic
discourse and knowledge construction. They conclude that there are significant increases
in the cognitive interaction, task-orientation and higher phases of knowledge construction (p.
349) when students use asynchronous discussion board. The two studies suggest a needfor educators and instructional designers to provide structures that enhance cognitive
interaction among participants.

17

All face-to-face participants were allowed to hold either pair or group discussions in theirclassroom during normal lessons.

Later, they were asked to make presentations to the whole class for comments from bothother members of the class and the class teacher.

For this research to produce expected results, I tried to motivate both the online and face toface participants. Esque and Mc Causland (1997), in Allison Rossett (2002), defined
motivation to learn as the attention and effort required to complete a learning task and thenapply the new material to the work site. Learners fall in one of the following two categories
when it comes to motivation (Allison, 2002);•

People with an active attitude towards life- these have a strong intrinsic motivation
to learn/participate.

•

People with a more passive attitude towards life- they lack intrinsic motivation andconsequently develop a reluctant approach towards learning/full participation. In
this case extrinsic motivation will be a key issue for them to overcome what might
appear to them as a barrier to full participation.

Generally, all the participants were motivated because they were informed well in advancethat the research instructional material was part of their training program and that grades
acquired during the period of the research would be treated as continuous assessment. In
other words, the grades which the participants obtained in the course of their participationin the research activities were compiled and submitted to the college assessment
committee which will in turn submit them to the national examining body. To create extrinsic
motivation for all the participants (both face-to-face and e-Learning participants), thefollowing were also done:i.

Show participants real needs- The participants were made to understand andappreciate how the research directly addressed their real needs. For example,
possibilities of having learners learn wherever and at any time unlike in the face18

to face mode where they will have to wait for the instructor. Face to faceparticipants were encouraged to study under this mode (face to face) because
the presence of a teacher in their classroom enabled them to get immediate
feedback from him/her. The course contained goals with specific standards ofperformance that could be completed in a short time. The instructional
objectives that demonstrated the usefulness of instruction matched withauthentic exercises and concrete examples directly related/applicable to their
daily struggles within their learning environments were developed. The
participants were also made to understand that, with asynchronous e-Learning
training put in place, the problem of teacher shortage would be minimized if noteliminated.

ii.

Provision of a conducive environment- I made sure that there was enoughsupport for full participation of all the subjects despite the inadequacy ofcomputers for all participants. The tactics included making sure that all
participants had web access despite the small bandwidth of the internet andprovision of a quiet place to study (for online participants). For face to faceparticipants, all necessary materials for their learning were provided. For
example, text books, handouts, allocation of classrooms, etc. It was ensured
that both face to face and e-Learning participants felt it was acceptable or safe
to participate in the research even during working (class time) or odd hours.
Both college supervisors and managers were well informed about the research
activities and their importance.

iii.

Provision of both pull and push strategies- in push strategies, the research
activities completion were required and monitored. In other words, an
expectation was set and what was expected was inspected. Participants were
informed that there would be real-time tracking and reporting of participation
using either an LMS or physical observation of activities. A constant and19frequent communication between the participants and me before, during andeven just after the research activities were ensured and maintained.

iv.

Focus on results- All participants were told what they would be able toaccomplish by fully participating in the research activities.

v.

Focus on ensuring success- It was stressed that both the e-Learning andface-to-face instructional materials were designed around situations and needsof people like them, so it would be immediately applicable to them. They werealso informed that the e-Learning and face to face courses were structured sothat successful completion was well within their capabilities

vi.

Highlight the topics of interest- even the most reluctant participants might
have been more motivated to participate in the research when they knew that a
topic which is covered in the regular course was covered online.

vii.

Maintain a conducive environment- Increased motivation could be directly
related to how the participants were impacted by environmental factors, people
support, learning design strategy, and ease of use when it came to technology
infrastructures. There was an online interaction with peers, and the instructor inan asynchronous way. As for face –to- face participants, a situation was created
where they were able to communicate and interact with one another throughgroup discussions and at times pair work. In both cases, participants wererequired to do assignments and ask questions either to their instructor or peers.

viii.

Giving legitimate feedback- All the participants (both online and face to face)were given immediate feedback for them to assess themselves how well they
were learning the content and performing in the course. The participants
needed assertion, assurance and being told that they were doing well.

20

ix.

Chunk the information- the e-Learning instructional material were divided into
compact, 20 minute or less learning chunks for easy and effective presentation
to participants in a digestible fashion. It included a review of prerequisites, an
overview of objectives, interactive presentation of new material, job related
exercises, and a brief summary.

Where possible, the ‘need to know’

information was separated from the ‘nice to know’.

x.

Provide the human touch- An online environment was created whereparticipants had time to chat, email one another, audio streaming and an online
mentoring, assignment of learning guides, to keep high learnability standards.

3.2 Research Participants
In this research, a total number of 100 pre-service teacher trainees were involved as
participants. These included 81 (81%) male and 19 (19%) female teacher trainees of age
range between 18 and 40 years old. All of them were those who had completed senior highschool education and passed in Mathematics (Chiwaya, M. et.al, 2007). All were full timetrainees and 61 of them indicated that they were married and had children at home. All
these participants were computer illiterate.

Therefore, there was need to train allparticipants some simple computing basics. There were no specified criteria for selectionof participants as they were randomly selected. Background knowledge and skills in IT was
not considered as prerequisite for recruitment in the research activities.

During the research activities, 9 participants (2 one to one, 2 small group, 1 field trial and 4
face to face participants ) dropped out due to various reasons including picking other jobs,
illnesses and scoring high marks in the pretest. All participants came from Kasungu
Teacher Training College. This research is considered special because the participants
involved were real teacher trainees unlike in some researches where simulations are used.

21

3.3 Instrumentation
The materials used in data collection for this research were questionnaires, observation
forms, an e-Learning Mathematics instructional material, and tests (refer to Appendices 3, 5,
13, 14, 15, 16). In order to come up with a good and effective asynchronous e-Learning
instructional material, the following procedures were followed: current Mathematics
curriculum analysis and review → design/prototyping → instructional material development+ expert review →one on one and small group formative evaluation→ revision (ADDIE
Model in Suzuki, 2004, chapter 2). In other words, the first step in coming up with aMathematics e-Learning course was an analysis and a review of the current Malawi
Mathematics curriculum for training elementary school pre-service teachers. This activity
assisted in determining the weaknesses and strengths of the face to face instructional
material. This also assisted me in figuring out what should be included in the e-instructional
material which was then being developed.

Then, I designed and consequently developed a Mathematics e-Learning instructional
material for 5 units based on one topic only. The topic was about ‘teaching of numbers andbasic addition’. The 5 units included:•

Unit1: Teaching of Pre-number activities•

Unit 2: Teaching of numbers•

Unit 3: Teaching of place values of numbers•

Unit 4: Teaching of addition of whole numbers and•Unit 5: Teaching of subtraction of whole numbers

Each unit was split into small teachable lessons. The instructional material was uploaded toFree Hostia web server and it could be accessed using the following URL:
http://kwerengwe.freehostia.com/main.php

Figure 2 below shows sample pages of the asynchronous e-Learning instructional material.

22

23

Figure 2: structure of e-Learning instructional material

The instructional material went through the design and expert review processes where
three subject matter experts for Mathematics were consulted to give their views on thequality of the instructional material. In the design review, I tried to answer the following
questions:•

Does the instructional goal match the problem identified in the needs assessment?

•

Do the learner and the environmental analysis match the audience?

•

Does the task analysis include all the prerequisite skills?

•

Are the test items reliable and valid, and do they match the objectives?

The expert review stage involved two teacher trainers (both from Kasungu Teachers
Training College) and an instructional material designer at the Malawi Institute of Education.
The instructional designer once worked as an elementary school pre-service teacher trainer
in Mathematics. The teacher trainers and the instructional designer were involved in thisexercise as experts/checkers (Suzuki, 2002, chapter 1) who could provide and offer advice
on what could be done to increase usability and quality of the e-Learning instructional
material. Figures 3 below shows a Mathematics subject expert reading the asynchronous
e-Learning instructional material and later attending to a face to face interview.

24Figure 3: subject matter expert

Face to face interview with

Reading Instructional material

subject matter expert

During the expert review stage, the following questions were taken into consideration;•

Is the content accurate and up-to-date?

•

Does it present a consistent perspective?

•

Are examples, practice exercises, and feedback realistic and accurate?

•

Is the pedagogy consistent with current instructional theory?

•

Is the instruction appropriate to the audience? (Refer to Appendix 16, for the
checklist)

The one-to-one and small group formative evaluations were done within the last two weeks
of October, 2009. After these two important stages, the instructional material was then fully
implemented (field phase trial) as follows: all e-Learning and face to face participants wereasked to take an entry and a pretest before they started studying their respective courses.
The entry test had 20 multiple choice questions and the pretest had 22 items with both
multiple choice and free response questions (refer to Appendices 7 and 16). Then eachgroup (control and experiment) was allowed to start their respective courses. Face to facelearners were taught in class by an instructor and e-Learning participants studied online. In
both cases, quizzes, midcourse test and a posttest were administered (Ingram and Hathorn,
2003 in Suzuki, 2004, chapter 9). The midcourse test had 14 multiple choice questions
whereas the posttest had 18 multiple choice questions and 4 structured questions (refer toAppendices 3 and 5). All these initiatives were made because findings emphasise thatusing true/false or multiple choice responses only is not encouraged in higher educational25

environments (Hettiarachchi, E). Moreover, there is some evidence that on-line assessment,
unless carefully planned, can encourage students to focus on lower level cognitive skills.
The educational effectiveness of on-line assessment that concentrates primarily or
exclusively on true/false or multiple choice responses, for example, is highly questionable
in a higher education environment. As is widely known, such approaches to assessment
can have direct negative effects on learners’ approaches to learning by encouraging narrow
reproduction rather than the development of higher order cognition that involves, forexample, critical evaluation.

For the online instructional material, in text questions were also provided with answers
hidden within the passages. The main reason for inclusion of in text questions was toprovide a situation similar to face to face teaching where a teacher may ask questions tolearners during a lesson presentation in class. Audio and video clips were embedded into
the e-Learning instructional material to make it equivalent to face to face learning. Figure 4
below shows an online participant watching and listening to a video clip.

Figure 4: An online participant listening to and watching a video clip while studying

The e-Learning instructional material was divided into 15 one hour self-study lessons.
Besides tests, survey questionnaires, and observation forms were also designed anddeveloped (refer to Appendices 14 and 15). For the validity and reliability of the test items
and the quizzes, views from three Mathematics subject experts were sought. Their26

recommendations and suggestions were taken into consideration on the improvement of
the test/quiz items. A grade of 65% or above was regarded as a pass for each group ofparticipants. A Friendster bulletin board was identified through which the online participants
were able to send assignments, ask and answer questions, and make comments on theirfriends’ work. While the face to face participants were allowed to hold pair or group
discussions, ask questions during lesson presentations and send their assignments on
paper. All group discussions were assessed by the class instructor.

The learning content was the same in both face to face and e-Learning courses. The
difference was the mode of their delivery. Face to face participants were given text books tostudy outside class. The learning content had text information, pictures or diagrams, andquestions within the text. They were also given quizzes to practise but these were marked
or checked by the instructor.

Face-to-face lessons and the e-Learning course were facilitated by the same instructor who
is also the author of this thesis. Rooms for operation of the asynchronous e-Learning
course were computer laboratories. This decision was made because these facilities were
not oftenly used by the other college teacher trainees. Most of the times, the computerlaboratories are idle. This is so because in Malawian teacher training programs, computer
literacy education is not a priority. In other words, teacher trainees are encouraged to visit
computer rooms after working hours which is mostly at night. So, taking this scenario into
consideration, it was felt that the computer laboratories would be the ideal places for the eLearning course implementation for two main reasons:•

There would be minimal or no interference at all in the course operations.

•

They were suitable for operation of the e-Learning course since the study would
need the use of computers.

As for the face to face lessons, they were carried out in the classrooms which wereallocated by the college authorities.

27

As a way of ensuring success of the research activities, the e-Learning instructional
material was delivered to and accessed by participants using the internet (wide area
network). All online participants were required to log in using User IDs and password inorder to get access to the instructional material. In this case, each online participant wasgiven a user Id and a password different from his/her friends’. Figure 5 below shows
participants logging into the e-Learning system.

Figure 5: participants logging into the e-Learning system
The e-Learning system had a Learning Management System (LMS) which had thefollowing functionalities: recording learning duration for each participant, marking eachlearner’s multiple choice answers, showing the learners’ grade and advising him/her what
to do, keeping a summary of all test grades for each participants and showing a summaryof performance for each test item (refer to Appendices 2, 4, 6, and 8).

3.4 Asynchronous discussion board
This study ran for one and a quarter months – 5 weeks, i.e. from 20th October to 25th
November, 2009. The course instructor (also the author) prepared the students to use an
asynchronous discussion board on Friendster bulletin board by first introducing them to thesoftware, its capabilities and how its range of functions was specifically adapted for the
purpose of the classes. An asynchronous discussion board is a web application for holding
discussions and user-generated content. Discussions are grouped in threads that contain amain posting and all related replies. For example, when a student posts a question, it
appears in the main thread and subsequent responses will be indented under the thread.

28

Typically, each posting may have multiple indented threads as responses to the originalquestion. Students can post questions and responses at any time. There is, therefore, notime constraint on users. Also, students can navigate the postings in nonlinear order(Mabrito, 2006, in Ajayi, 2009). In this way, it allows students to deliberate, reflect, andsimultaneously utilize other resources (texts, tools, people, and other technologies –websites), thus promoting active and critical learning (Biesenbach-Lucas, 2004, in Ajayi,2009). It also allows students, when used regularly, to develop a sense of virtual
community.

The integration of a discussion board into the course was designed to facilitate an
engagement with course content as well as provide the participants a space for a social
relation and collaboration. Figure 6 shows some participants using the asynchronous
discussion board on Friendster bulletin board.

Figure 6: participants using Friendster bulletin board for postings and commenting
on their colleagues’ work.

All online participants logged onto the Friendster bulletin board to reflect and discuss theirperceptions of the topics covered during their studies. Each participant (a) posted aquestion about topics covered in the course, (b) posted a response to another participant’s
question, (c) postings addressed course related topics, and (d) postings discussed andreflected critically on their perceptions of learning.

29

The structured nature of the assignment was to facilitate a productive social interaction by
ensuring that the participants engage in in-depth discussions rather than random postings.
On weekly basis, the course instructor read the postings, provided comments and gradedthem as one way of motivating the participants. The grades formed part of their continuous
assessment as per requirement. The instructor’s comments were designed to provide
additional ideas and concepts on different topics. All the threads were available to theparticipants to view throughout the research period.

3.5 Procedures
Data collection took place from 20thOctober – 25th November, 2009 for the 2009/2010
Malawi academic year. The research activities were split into three phases of formativeevaluation. These three phases were; one –to- one, small group and field trials. (Dick andCarey, 1991, in Morrison and Ross, 2007). One-to-one trials occurred during the process ofdevelopment of the instructional material. This exercise was done in order to try out the
instructional material with individual learners (Brenneman, 1989, in Morrison and Ross,
2007, Suzuki, 2002). The goal was to obtain descriptive information pertaining to the clarity,
impact and feasibility of initial versions of the instructional material. A total number of 8
individual participants were involved in the one-to-one formative evaluation. They included
high, average and low achievers in class.

Main measures of this task included

observations, survey questionnaire and interviews with the participants.

The small group trial also consisted of 8 participants (Morrison and Ross, 2007). In thisexercise, a more developed version of the instructional material was used. Throughobservational, attitudinal and performance data, it was possible to identify the weaknesses
and strengths of the instructional material before it was put in the final form. Rosen (1986)
andRothkipf(1963)

observed

thefollowing

weaknesses

with

instructions;(i)teachers/trainers are not good predictors of the effectiveness of instructional content. (ii)
Instructional Theory is not a perfect science. (iii) Few instructional products are ever
evaluated with learners.

30

During the small group phase, the participants were allowed to study the instructional
material, do all tasks within the instructional material and then evaluated. Figure 7 below
shows participants studying online.

Figure 7: participants studying online
They also included low, average and high class achievers. At this stage, Mathematics
subject expert view was also sought where one instructor at Kasungu Teacher Training
College and an instructional designer from Malawi Institute of Education were involved.
These were picked from the Mathematics department. The subject matter experts wereasked to look at the instructional material and all tests to determine both the weaknesses
and strengths of the instructional material.

The third stage was the field trial which examined the use of the instruction with full sizedlearner group under realistic conditions. The main measures were performance andattitudes. A total of 80 pre-service teacher trainees were involved at this stage. Before thestart of data collection exercise, two groups of 40 teacher trainees each were set up. The
participants were then briefed and oriented on procedures of the research andasynchronous e-Learning as a mode of training. Figure 8 below shows field phaseparticipants being oriented on the research activities.

31

Figure 8: Participants being oriented to research activities

Then arrangements were made that one group of participants should use the e-Learning
Mathematics instructional material and the other group to learn the same instructional
material through face-to-face mode. This was followed by interviews which sought to solicit
online participants’ attitudes towards and impressions on asynchronous e-Learning, i.e. tounderstand participants’ opinions of asynchronous e-Learning. The interviews were done
online. Most of the questions were structured for controllability with regard to time andcontent. Very few questions were open-ended. Open ended questions had been included
so that learners’ feelings and the reasons for them on asynchronous e-Learning would beobtained (refer to Appendix 13) The close-ended questions consisted of a longer list ofalternatives from which the participants would be checking interesting or important choices
or rating the alternatives on a numerical scale.
All participants were observed as they were using the e-Learning instructional material.
Similarly, students learning through face-to-face mode were observed. Observing
participants during interaction with the e-Learning instructional material provided
information about participants’ attitudes towards the e-Learning mode of delivery.

Four instruments were used to collect data for the study. They were: (a) students’ postings
on the discussion board: this included the weekly posted questions, answers andcomments. (b) Interviews: students were interviewed regarding their experiences using
discussion board and the e-Learning instructional material, (c) written reflection: eachparticipant answered free response questions to give their perceptions regarding the e-

32

Learning mode of delivery and the impact of discussion board as a tool of learning to teach,and (d) tests. Assignments pertaining to discussion board carried 20 points. Face to faceinterviews with the participants took place at an open place towards the end of the research
activities. Figure 9 below shows some of the online participants attending face to faceinterviews.

Figure 9: face to face interviews with online participants

The interview questions were based on the theoretical framework proposed by Gee (2007)
in Ajayi (2009) that tools and technologies mediate learning and that technology is a
product and process of socially dynamic relations (Davies, 2006, p. 219) that promotes:• Active learning by promoting reflection• Learning as a social practice involving shared practices, interaction, and collaboration• Dialogue between students and between students and faculty• Freedom, autonomy, and flexibility• Different types of knowledge.

Both the asynchronous e-Learning and face-to-face participants took the sameassignments and tests under the same conditions. The test items were both multiple choiceand structured questions.

The evidence and proof of asynchronous e-Learning effectiveness was collected from asummaryofstudents’feedback,

ratingsofasynchronous

e-Learning,

performance/assessment results, records of observations of learners’ behaviour, and33

department evaluations of the instructional material (refer to Appendices 2 and 16).
Effectiveness answers the question, “To what degree did the students accomplish thelearning objectives prescribed in the course?” Both face to face and the asynchronous eLearning participants took an entry test, pretest and a posttest (Suzuki, 2002, Chapter 3).

A passing mark of 65% for those participating in asynchronous e-Learning against thetraditional 40% for face to face learners was set in order to determine whether
asynchronous e-Learning can be more effective than face-to-face mode. The scoresobtained were displayed on frequency graphs or histograms for easy analyses. Then, thenet gains in both asynchronous e-Learning and face to face learning were compared andanalysed.

Whilst doing the study, documents and information on Malawi’s teacher training education
system and ICT infrastructure was also collected. The information collected assisted indetermining the challenges faced by the Malawi education system and hence, determine if
asynchronous e-Learning could be most suitable type of e-Learning for teacher training in
Malawi.

The data set was, therefore, constructed from multiple sources which included:•

A series of observations of the online participants. Each observation lasted for over
one hour, and extensive notes recorded. Some online participants were given a
copy of the notes along with an evaluation form on which they were asked toevaluate the accuracy of the evaluations.

•

A series of one hour-long online questionnaire were conducted over the period of
the study to each asynchronous e-Learning participant.

•Reports from asynchronous e-Learning participants only (experimental group) andMathematics subject experts about asynchronous e-Learning.

•

Both online and face to face participants’ (teacher trainees) assessment data.

•

One to one asynchronous e-Learning participants were given paper basedquestionnaires (refer to Appendices 1, 7, 13, and 14).

34

In this research, both qualitative and quantitative data was collected. The qualitative(involving impressions) data was collected by use of observation of participants in thecourse of using the e-Learning instructional material, interview responses and open-ended
survey questionnaire responses. Quantitative (involving numerical indices) data wascollected by use of tests and closed-ended survey questionnaires.

35

Chapter 4
Data and analyses
4.1 Types of collected data
Data in this study are both qualitative and quantitative which consist of written
documentation collected from pre-service teacher trainees, records of the instructor (theauthor) made after several online lesson observations, interviews with participants and testscore results (refer to Appendices 2, 3, 7 and 15). The data were collected from thefollowing groups of participants: Mathematics expert reviewers, one to one, small group,
experimental (field trial) and control groups.
A discussion of qualitative data analysis will be given first followed by quantitative data
analysis in sections 4.2 and 4.3 respectively.

Analysis of the data set consists primarily of tabulation of quantitative data such as the testscores and rating scale, and content analysis of qualitative data (interviews, written
responses, and video clips). Data were coded according to a matrix that was developed tohelp focus the analysis on four general areas: a) context variables, or "What was going on
during asynchronous e-Learning studies?"; b) process variables or "What were theparticipants actually doing as evidenced by classroom practices; and c) outcome variablesor "How the participants had changed as a result of online studies. (d) Interactivity – when
the participants’ responses confirmed, appreciated, challenged or learned from others’
ideas or positions ".

Data were compressed, integrated, and written into interim case summaries which included
descriptive, narrative and direct quotes (Erickson, 1986) in Ajayi (2009). The following were
the research findings based on qualitative data:

4.2 Qualitative data analysis
Qualitative data consist of data set collected from one to one, small group, and field trial(experimental) participants. These were obtained through questionnaire surveys, observing
the participants and holding discussions with them about the quality and effectiveness of36

the instructional material and the mode of delivery. An asynchronous discussion board was
also used in data collection.

4.2.1 One to one formative evaluation results
One-to-one formative evaluation occurred during the process of development of the
instructional material. This exercise was done in order to try out the instructional material
with individual learners (Brenneman, 1989, in Morrison and Ross, 2007, Suzuki, 2002). The
goal was to obtain descriptive information pertaining to the clarity, impact and feasibility of
initial versions of the instructional material. Data was collected through discussions, survey
questionnaires and participants’ reports. Figure 10 below shows the instructor holding
discussion with one to one formative evaluation participants about the quality andeffectiveness of the asynchronous e-Learning instructional material and its delivery mode.

Figure10: instructor holding discussions with one to one participants.

Appendices 14 and 15 show the instrumentations that were used in the one to one
formative evaluation. Table 2 below shows the responses given by one to one formativeevaluation participants about their opinions and impressions on quality of instructional
material and asynchronous e-Learning effectiveness.
Table 2: One to one formative evaluation summary results
Question /response

Yes

SomehowNo

Was the time adequate for learning thismaterial?
Were the examples given relevant to the

1

2

5

Not
sure
0

7

0

1

0

37

content and course objectives?
Were the examples adequate enough to makeyou learn comfortably?
Did the examples and explanations clarify
concepts and new ideas?
Did you find this material helpful enough toassist you teach numbers and basic operations
comfortably and effectively?
Would you rate this material as good enoughfor self –learning?
Were explanations clear enough to make youlearn without problems?
Was the language used in this material
appropriate for self learning?
Did you face any problems with this
instructional material?
Does the content meet all the learning
objectives

5

1

2

0

5

3

0

0

5

1

2

0

4

3

1

0

5

2

1

0

7

0

1

0

3

3

2

0

3

2

3

0

Note: 1, 27 7= number of participants (out of 8) in the category

Responses to survey questionnaire
Item/response
An asynchronous e-Learning
course will be more convenient
for me than a traditionalclassroom course.
Taking an e-learning course will
give me more flexibility than a
traditional classroom course
There is higher interactivity inasynchronous e-Learning withfellow students as well as
lecturers than in face to facemode
After the asynchronous eLearning course, I will need an
instructor to teach me the samecontent.
I expect anybody learning
through this mode to performbetter than one doing face toface
If I continued learning using
asynchronous e-Learning, myperformance in class would
improve.
Given the chance to choose themode of training, I would go forasynchronous e-Learning
I like asynchronous e-Learning

Strongly
agree

Agree

DisagreeStrongly
disagreeUndecided

2 (25%)

5(62.5%)

1 (12.5%)

003(37.5%)

5(62.5%)

00

01(12.5%)

3(37.5%)

3 (37.5%)0

1 (12.5%)

1(12.5%)

2 (25%)

4 (50%)

1(12.5%)

0

2 (25%)

2 (25%)

3 (37.5%)0

1 (12.5%)

2 (25%)

5(62.5%)

1 (12.5%)00

2 (25%)

5(62.5%)

1 (12.5%)

003(37.5%)

2 (25%)

3 (37.5%)

0

0

38

because it gave me a lot ofopportunity
tomakecontributions
duringthelearning process.
Note: 1, 27 7= number of participants (out of 8) in the category

The one to one participants indicated how they rated asynchronous e-Learning as follows:
To what extent would you recommend this type of learning to friends?
2 (25%) said they would recommend it to their friends as excellent, 4 (50%) said it is goodand 2 (25%) said it is average.

How do you rate the e-Learning mode of delivery?
3 (37.5%) rated it as the best, 4 (50%) said it is good and 1 (12.5%) rated it as average.

How effective is this mode of training?
Out of 8 one to one participants, 7 (87.5%) felt the asynchronous e-Learning effectivenessis good and 1(12.5%) said it is average.

In addition to these responses, the following statements were also produced by one to one
participants in their reports about asynchronous e-Learning:“This method of learning is very good because the learner uses his or her knowledge
when dealing with work given to do and this also improves the thinking capacity of alearner.”“Yes, I liked the asynchronous e-Learning course, because it is faster than face to face inthat I have learnt a lot of things for a short period of time. For example, prenumber activities,
just to mention a few.”

4.2.2 Observations made during and after one to one formative evaluation
The one to one phase revealed (through observation) that most participants had shown
positive attitudes and interest in e-Learning. This was shown by their enthusiasm to study

39online. Most of them requested to continue studying even if it was past midnight. The
participants acquired the following knowledge, skills, and attitudes during the training:
Basic IT skills, teaching of numbers and basic operations, participating in discussions
online, interacting with each other and instructors online, and respecting each others’ views.
They also developed confidence that people can learn through a computer.

There was very high participation by almost all participants despite electricity and internet
problems. However, few one to one participants asked questions both to their fellow
students and the instructor. A discussion board was instituted. Participants were also
allowed to post questions on the discussion board.

The one to one participants’ interests in the asynchronous e-Learning lessons were on thefollowing features: Layout of instructions, quizzes with immediate feedback, and interactingwith fellow participants. The quality of their participation was rated as very high.
Contributions made were positive and highly assisted them to improve their thinking ability.

Despite all these positive developments, I observed that my organization is not yet readyfor e-Learning. This was evidenced by the following factors: all instructors are almost
computer illiterate, the institution has many computers but with a very small internet
bandwidth which can accommodate about five computers only. Funding and policies for eLearning activities are not there.

The college managers feel e-Learning is costly as

opposed to paper-based instructional materials. However, individual learners are ready for
e-Learning. This was evidenced by participants’ enthusiasm to continue learning through eLearning. Some of them said they could be happy if they were given a chance to learn
through online.

Despite the above factors about my institution, asynchronous e-Learning is still best suited
to my organization and to its learners. My argument is based on the following reasons: theinstitution has computers and an internet connection although not very reliable, cannot

40accommodate all students who apply for teacher training courses, and most learners had
shown great interest in e-Learning.

During the observation exercise, the one to one participants sought clarifications on
computer operations and how they could view and send mails and /or postings from and to
fellow participants. As for the instructional material, majority indicated that they did not haveany problems with the language, quizzes and the examples given and that there wasadequate information to enable self-learning go on smoothly. However, some participantssuggested that some lessons needed enough examples, pictures, and additional
information so that learners could find it easy to learn on their own. All participants who
required and asked for assistance on operating a computer were shown how to do it. In
very few cases, some participants sought for clarification of certain concepts and they wereassisted immediately. Figure 11 below shows instructor observing and assisting
participants who may have technical problems with the e-Learning system.

Figure 11: instructor observing participants while studying online.

4.2.3. Results from small group formative evaluation
In the small group formative evaluation, a more developed version of the instructional
material was used. Through observational, attitudinal and performance data, it waspossible to identify the weaknesses and strengths of the instructional material before it was
put in the final form. Data was collected through observations, survey questionnaires andreports on the asynchronous discussion board. Most small group participants felt the41

instructional material was far much better for self learning, and consequently suggested
that there was no need to modify any part of the instructional material. However, very few
participants suggested the following: addition of more pictures, examples, notes andcorrecting some typos in the text of the instructional material. Most participants had showneasiness in using the instructional material. This was shown as most learners completed
the course without

asking any question for clarification despite my presence all the time.

The only questions that I received were those concerning computer operations.

Table 3: Small group formative evaluation summary results
Question /response

Yes

SomehowNo

Was the time adequate for learning thismaterial?
Were the examples given relevant to thecontent and course objectives?
Were the examples adequate enough to makeyou learn comfortably?
Did the examples and explanations clarify
concepts and new ideas?
Did you find this material helpful enough toassist you teach numbers and basic operations
comfortably and effectively?
Would you rate this material as good enoughfor self –learning?
Were explanations clear enough to make youlearn without problems?
Was the language used in this material
appropriate for self learning?
Did you face any problems with this
instructional material?
Does the content meet all the learning
objectives

5

2

0

Not
sure
1

7

1

0

0

6

2

0

0

8

0

0

0

5

2

0

1

6

2

0

0

5

2

1

0

7

0

1

0

1

3

4

0

3

4

0

1

Note: 1, 27 8= number of participants (out of 8) in the category

Responses to survey questionnaire by small group participants
Item/response
An asynchronous e-Learning
course will be more convenient forme than a traditional classroom
course.
Taking an e-learning course will
give me more flexibility than a
traditional classroom course
There is higher interactivity in

Strongly
agree

Agree

DisagreeStrongly
disagreeUndecided

3 (37.5)

3
(37.5
%)

1
(12.5%)

1(12.5%)0

4 (50%)

4
(50%)

0

0

0

42

asynchronous e-Learning withfellow students as well as lecturers
than in face to face mode
After the asynchronous e-Learning
course, I will need an instructor toteach me the same content.
I expect anybody learning throughthis mode to perform better than
one doing face to face
If I continued learning using
asynchronous e-Learning, myperformance in class would
improve.
Given the chance to choose themode of training, I would go forasynchronous e-Learning

I like asynchronous e-Learning
because it gave me a lot ofopportunity to make contributions
during the learning process.

4
(50%)
3
(37.5
%)

3
(37.5%)

1(12.5%)

05(62.5%)

00

2 (25%)

5
(62.5
%)

1
(12.5%)

00

4 (50%)

3
(37.5
%)

0

1
(12.5%)0

4 (50%)

3
(37.5
%)

0

0

1 (12.5%)

3(37.5%)

3
(37.5
%)

0

1
(12.5%)

1 (12.5%)00Note: 1, 27 5= number of participants (out of 8) in the category

The Small group participants also answered the following questions to get their opinions
and impressions about asynchronous e-Learning:

To what extent would you recommend this type of learning to a friend?
3 (37.5%) participants said they would recommend it as excellent, 4 (50%) said it is goodand 1 (12.5%) said is it average. None said it is poor.

How do you rate the e-Learning mode of delivery?
4 (50%) rated asynchronous e-Learning as the best, 2 (25%) said it is good and 2 (25%)
said is it average. None of the small group participants rated it as poor or very poor.

How effective is this mode of training?
Out of the 8 small group participants: 3 (37.5%) said it is excellent, 3 (37.5%) said it is good,
1 (12.5%) rated it as average and 1 (12.5%) said it is very poor.

43

4.2.4. Results from Mathematics Expert reviewers
There was an expert review exercise of the instructional material by three Mathematics
subject experts. The mathematics expert reviewers were given the instructional material to
study and later make recommendations and suggestions for improvement. The following
was their combined report on the instructional material and the e-Learning system:•

Strengths of the instructional material – inclusion of background information,
proper organization of the content, well formulated and laid out procedures, wellformulated questions for exercises, quizzes and tests, relevant informationaccording to the teacher training curriculum and the vocabulary used was to thelevel of the participants.

•

Weaknesses of the instructional material- very few and minor ones such as thephrase ‘pre-number activities’ not defined, there was no mention of the relationshipbetween sorting out and classifying objects in pre-number activities lesson, thenumber 4 was not properly introduced so that it would be difficult for learners to
introduce big numbers such as 12, teaching of writing of numbers not properly
followed and all specific objectives should have the word ‘must’ instead of ‘should’.

•

Suggestions for improvement- all three indicated that the instructional material
was okay but suggested the following; inclusion of meaning of pre-number activities
in the concerned lesson, relationship between sorting out and classifying objects beclarified, and to use add on method when introducing the numbers 4, 5, = andupwards.

Based on the responses of the one to one, small group formative evaluation participants,
and the Mathematics subject experts provided, no major changes and /or modifications
were made to the instructional material. The only changes which were made werecorrection of typos and grammatical errors, adding pictures and little more information tosome parts of instructional material and refining content on how numbers from 4 onwards
can be introduced.

44

4.2.5 Field trial (experimental) phase results
The field phase trial was the main part of the study. This is where a full implementation of
the asynchronous e-Learning instructional material was done under normal conditions. 40
participants were involved in the field phase study. Data was collected through survey
questionnaires, discussions and reports from participants.

This research mainly focused on the feasibility and effectiveness of asynchronous eLearning in teacher training programs. It tried to answer the following questions:•

Why is the research I want to conduct important and unique?

•

What are the pre-service teachers' views of asynchronous e-learning as a tool forlearning to teach?

•

What are the participants' perceptions of the kinds of learning opportunities affordedby asynchronous discussion board instruction?

•

What are the participants' views of the contribution of other students to the learning
process in asynchronous discussion boards?

•

Are e-mail and forum facilities a fair substitute for face to face interaction?

•

What are the advantages of asynchronous e-Learning in Malawian scenario?

•

What are the special factors to consider when facilitating interaction in an
asynchronous environment?

•

What are the barriers to facilitating interaction in an asynchronous environment?

•

What are the disadvantages and limitations of asynchronous e-Learning in Malawi?

•

What are the anticipated problems students may face once e-Learning is
introduced in teacher training colleges in Malawi?

•

What features will make the e-Learning materials attractive to students?

•

How can asynchronous e-Learning be effective in teacher training programs in
Malawi?

•What kind of support will asynchronous e-Learning participants require?

•

Who/what will decide the effectiveness of an e-Learning material?

45

To obtain participants’ opinions and impressions about asynchronous e-Learning, thefollowing questionnaire (Appendix 13) was given to all online participants and their
responses were recorded as follows:

Item 1: Taking an e-learning course will give me more flexibility than a traditionalclassroom course.
Out of a total of 39 field phase participants, 16 (41%) strongly agreed, 17 (44%) agreed, 4(10%) participants disagreed, and 2 (5%) strongly disagreed that an online course would
give them more flexibility to learn than in face to face. Figure 12 below shows theexperimental group’s response over flexibility in asynchronous e-Learning.

16

ag
re
e

ag
re
e

17

18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0

4

2

0

di
sa
st
gr
ro
ee
ng
ly
di
sa
gr
ee
un
de
cid
ed

st
ro
ng
ly

Number of participants

Asynchronous e-Learning flexibility

Participants' responses
Figure12: experiment group’s responses on asynchronous e-Learning flexibility

Item 2: An asynchronous e-Learning course will be more convenient for me than a
traditional classroom course.
11 (28%) participants strongly agreed, 21 (54%) agreed, 7 (18%) disagreed and nonestrongly disagreed that asynchronous e-Learning is more convenient for them than face to46

face mode of delivery.

Figure 13 below shows a summary of the field trial (experiment)

Asynchronous e-Learning convinience
over face to face mode
21
11

7

ed

0

un
de
cid

ag
re
e
di
s

st
ro
ng
ly

di
s

ag
re
e

0

ag
re
e

ag
re
e

25
20
15
10
5
0

st
ro
ng
ly

Number of participants

participants’ responses about convenience in asynchronous e-Learning.

participants' responses

Figure 13: participants’ responses about convenience in asynchronous e-Learning

Item 3: There is higher interactivity in asynchronous e-Learning with fellow
students as well as lecturers than in face to face mode.
4 (10%) participants strongly agreed, 11 (28%) agreed, 19 (49%) disagreed, 2 (5%)
strongly disagreed and 3 (8%) were undecided about higher interactivity in asynchronous
e-Learning than in face to face. Figure 14 below shows a summary of the experimentalgroup’s views on interactivity in asynchronous e-Learning.

47

Number of participants

Interactivity in asynchronus e-Learning
19

20
15
10
5

11
4

2

3

di
sa
st
gr
ro
ee
ng
ly
di
sa
gr
ee
un
de
cid
ed

ag
re
e

st
ro
ng
ly

ag
re
e

0

Participants' responses

Figure 14: participants’ views about interactivity in asynchronous e-Learning.

Item 4: After the asynchronous e-Learning course, I will need an instructor to teachme the same content.
3(8%) participants strongly agreed, 14 (36%) agreed, 19 (48%) disagreed and 3 (8%)
strongly disagreed. The experimental group’s opinions on whether an instructor will bewhether an instructor is needed or notafter asynchronous e-Learning
19
14
3

di
sa
st
gr
ro
ee
ng
ly
di
sa
gr
ee
un
de
cid
ed

3

ag
re
e

ag
re
e

20
15
10
5
0

st
ro
ng
ly

number of participantsrequired or not after an asynchronous e-Learning course are shown in figure 15 below.

48
participants'
views

0

Figure 15: participants’ opinions on whether instructor is required or not after
asynchronous e- Learning

Item 5: I expect anybody learning through this mode to perform better than one
doing face to faceIn this category, 12 (31%) participants strongly agreed, 15 (38%) agreed, 8 (21%)
disagreed, 1 (3%) strongly disagreed and 3 (8%) were undecided that anybody learning
through asynchronous e-Learning can perform better than in face to face mode of training.
Figure 16 below shows the responses given by the field trial participants about
performance in asynchronous e-Learning.

20
15

15

12

8

10
5

1

3
undecided

strongly
disagreedisagreeagree0strongly
agree

Number of participants

asynchronous e-learners can performbetter than those in face to faceparticipants' responses

Figure 16: participants’ responses on whether asynchronous e-learners can performbetter than face to face learners.

Item 6: If I continued learning using asynchronous e-Learning, my performance inclass would improve.

49

Of the 39 field trial participants, 13 (33%) strongly agreed, 20 (51%) agreed, 5 (13%)
disagreed and 1 (3%) was undecided whether their performance would improve if they
continued with asynchronous e-Learning. Figure 17 below shows summary of theexperimental group’s views on improvement of performance if they continued studying
through asynchronous e-Learning.

25
20
15
10
5
0

20
13
0

1

strongly
disagreeundecided

disagreeagree

5strongly
agree

Number of participants

performance would increase using
asynchronous e-Learning

participants' responses

Figure 17: experiment participants’ opinions on whether their performance would
improve or not if exposed to asynchronous e-Learning.

Item 7: Given the chance to choose the mode of training, I would go forasynchronous e-Learning
13 (33%) participants strongly agreed, 20 (51%) agreed, 5 (13%) disagreed and 1 (3%)
was undecided whether they would go for an asynchronous e-Learning training or not if
given the chance to choose the type of delivery mode. Figure 18 below shows a summaryof experiment group’s responses.

50

20
13
1
undecided

disagree0strongly
disagree

5

agree

25
20
15
10
5
0

strongly
agree

Number of participants

Given the chance, I would choose
asynchronous e-Learning

participants' responses

Figure 18: participants’ opinions on whether they would choose asynchronous eLearning or not if given the chance.

Item 8: I like asynchronous e-Learning because it gave me a lot of opportunity tomake contributions during the learning process.
Responses given were as follows: 13 (33%) participants strongly agreed, 15 (38%) agreed,
11 (28%) disagreed that asynchronous e-Learning gave them a greater opportunity tomake contributions during the learning process. Summary of the field group participants’views and impressions about having a lot of opportunities for them to make contributions
during learning are shown in figure 19 below.

51

15

13

11
0
undecided

disagreestrongly
disagree

0
agree

20
15
10
5
0

strongly
agree

number ofparticipants

Asynchronous e-Learning gave me a lotof opportunity to make contributions
during learning

participants' views

Figure 19: participants’ feelings about making contributions during asynchronous eLearning.

Item 9: To what extent would you recommend this type of learning to a friend?
On the extent to which the participants would recommend asynchronous e-Learning to afriend, the following were the results; 13 (33%) said asynchronous e-Learning is excellent,
16 (41%) felt it is good and 10 (26%) said it is average. A summary of the experimentalgroup’s opinions on whether they would recommend asynchronous e-Learning to theirfriends is shown in figure 20 below.

52

20
15
10
5
0

16

13

10

po
or

0

ve
ry

po
or

av
er
ag
e

ex
ce
lle

go
od

0
nt

number ofparticipants

how participants would recommend
asynchronous e-Learning to theirfriends

participants' views
Figure 20: shows how participants would recommend asynchronous e-Learning totheir colleagues.
Item 10: How do you rate the e-Learning mode of delivery?
On rating of asynchronous e-Learning as a mode of delivery, the following views were
given: 14 (36%) participants rated it as the best, 15 (38%) rated it as good, and 10 (26%)
said it is average and none said it bad. Figure 21 below shows summary results of the fieldgroup participants’ rating of asynchronous e-Learning.

number of participants

Rating of asynchronous e-Learning byparticipants
20
15

14

15

10

10

5
0
best

good

average0
poor

participants' views
53

0
very
poor

Figure 21: Participants’ rating of asynchronous e-Learning.

Item 11: How effective is this mode of training?
Finally, on participants’ impressions about asynchronous e-Learning effectiveness as amode of training, the following were their responses: out of 39 participants, 8 (21%) said its
effectiveness is excellent, 22 (56%) said it is good and 9 (23%) felt it is average. Figure 22
below shows the summary results of the experimental group’s opinions about
asynchronous e-Learning effectiveness.

25
20
15
10
5
0

22

9

8

po
or

0

ve
ry

po
or

av
er
ag
e

go
od

nt

0

ex
ce
lle

number of participants

How effective is asynchronous eLearning

participants' views
Figure 22: experiment group participants’ impressions about asynchronous eLearning effectiveness4.2.6 Discussion of the qualitative data analysis
An analysis of the qualitative data (refer to section 4.2.5 and Appendix 13) revealed thatmajority of participants was impressed with asynchronous e-Learning. Data to substantiate
this observation was collected through survey questionnaires, discussions andparticipants’ reports on the asynchronous discussion board. It was also found out that the54

participants acquired a lot of knowledge and skills from their studies.

From theparticipants’ comments and reports, I found out that the following skills were acquired:technological, teaching, participatory, critical thinking, and respect of each other’s opinions.
The following comments from participants substantiate my arguments above:i) Technological skills
The following comments imply that the participants acquired basic IT skills from theirstudies through asynchronous e-Learning:“My feelings and general impressions about asynchronous e-Learning is that I wish if I
could use this type of learning throughout my life so that my life could benefit a lot from thistype of learning since it involves the use of technology which is now popular nowadays.”“I have felt happy to be one of the people using e-Learning and this method is goodcompared with other methods.”“And it improves knowledge and skills of computer to a learner since there are learning of
two things at once.”“I also had a chance to widen my knowledge on how to use a computer.”“Besides learning the course, learners are also imparted with the knowledge and skills ofcomputer since they are learning using computers.”“I like this e-Learning course and the reason is: learning through a computer or through a
website encourages seriousness and makes a person to pay more attention than in classand increases knowledge of a computer to match with modern world.”“Yes, because it exposes the learner to a wide range of communications through e-mails
and it also helps the learner to understand the world technologically since most of theinformation providers use computers.”“Yes l would recommend this mode of delivery because, first: learning is simple and one
cannot quarrel with teacher while learning and it also promote knowledge of computer.”“Yes. This is because the mode is faster and attractive if not obstructed by the failure of the
network (internet). Again, because we are living in the World of technology, learners should55therefore be trained to use computers as part and parcel of education which can lead to thedevelopment of the nation socially.”“Yes I would recommend this mode of delivery to a friend because of the following reason:
In order for all of us to be technologically advanced.”“Knowing mathematics and computer operation at once.”ii) Teaching skills
Some participants’ reports and comments revealed that basic teaching skills were alsoacquired. The following were direct quotes from some participants’ reports:“YES! I like this e-Learning course, because I have a confidence that I can apply theknowledge and skills, if I can continue learning this course.”“My feeling is that I have learnt more things and so it is good.”
And I feel to have more chance of learning a lot through this mode of training.
“Assuredly I would recommend this mode of delivery to a friend. I am saying this because I
learned clearly through this course. For example I have seen and learnt the proper steps ofteaching pre-numbers, introducing numbers and place values and since then I know themclearly through this course.”“Yes, I liked the asynchronous e-Learning course, because it is faster than face to face inthat I have learnt a lot of things for a short period of time. For example, prenumber activities,
just to mention a few.”iii) Participatory skills, autonomy and respect of each other’s opinions
The participants also acquired participatory skills and developed autonomy as well as
respect for each other’s opinions during the process of their study of the asynchronous eLearning instructional material. This assertion has been made on the basis of theparticipants’ statements which are quoted below:

56

“Since a discussion on the bulletin board is done on a computer and not face-to-face, thereis less intimidation of expressing myself compared to sharing my concerns during a wholeclass discussion.”“Bulletin board was a great way to read people’s different perspectives or ideas about
assigned questions. Many times . . . I noticed that my ideas were different from others
which was great because it helped me think of things differently which made me grow as apre-service teacher trainee.”“Shy learners can participate without shame e.g. asking questions.”“I like discussion board because it allowed us to work with, contribute to one another andshare thoughts and ideas freely.”“Another thing I learned from the discussion board was to respect others’ thinking. When I
read questions from classmates, I understood them. I appreciated their beliefs and feelings
towards education.”“I used to think that the teacher was the only one who has all the right answers, but now I
know that I can also learn from my colleagues.”“Usually, when you attend classes in schools, you do not get a chance to talk to many
people from your class. Even though I did not talk to some of my classmates face-to-face, I
talked to them through the bulletin board. . . I connected with many of the peoples’
questions and answers. It helped me think I was not alone in my studies.
“Yes. It's so because teaching deals with sharing with others.”“It better to use this mode of e-Learning since learners are fully participating.”“A learner is fully participating in the lesson.”“Learning takes place even when there is no teacher.”‘This is because student teachers will be able to interact with their teacher in terms oflearning even if he/she is away thus increasing the number of teachers.’“I need not to be in a classroom all the time.”“It is good because the learner is able to do the work on his/her own and freely.”
Learners can learn at their own time or any time provided the internet is there57

“It is important because I can learn where there is no teacher beside that I can beresourceful getting learning resources on my own.”iv) Critical thinking
During the follow up interviews, majority of participants indicated that asynchronous eLearning assisted them to develop critical thinking skills. The following are some of thestatements and comments made by some participants:“The course promotes critical thinking to learners since it needs only listening and reading
then applying knowledge. The subject was brought in phases and allowed a person to go toanother phase only if one has passed the test. So if one completes the whole course itmeans that he or she has indeed mastered what has been learnt.”“Yes, it gave me an opportunity to read the notes and interpret in my own views. The test
gave me enough confidence that I can work using my own understanding.”“I like asynchronous e-Learning because I was using my own understanding of theinformation displayed on the computer.”“I would recommend to my friend because it can assist learner to develop critical thinking
and reasoning capability.”“It is friendly as it is promoting self reliance to students. There is no favouritism or
discrimination during the learning process.”“It encourages individual work rather than group work which is common in face to facemode of delivery.”“This method of learning is very good because the learner uses his or her own knowledge
when dealing with work given to do and this also improves the thinking capacity of thelearner.”“It is good because it makes a learner to think critically on tasks given other than justrelying on a teacher all the time.”“I am more creative than before and have more interest to learn more.”v) The participants also developed general interest in asynchronous e-Learning.

58

I also noted that the participants developed general interest in the asynchronous eLearning instructional material and its mode of delivery. The following comments fromparticipants substantiate my assertion:“It is a very good mode of study and enjoyable.”“It is the best way of learning than to see a teacher because some how you may fall asleep
in class while a teacher is teaching.”“I am really feeling good and impressed by asynchronous e-Learning course.
“Because this mode of delivery is enjoyable.”“The mode attracted my entire interest that I managed to study through it for a long periodof time without losing interest which is different when I do use Hand Books. I also paid
much attention on the day I learnt from the wall display where I could see my lectureteaching about Pre-number Activities.”“This course is effective to slow learners since every one concentrate on his or her work.
And I say YES.”“Yes because l am used to this e-Learning course.”“Yes, I would recommend this course to a friend because it saves much time to a learner.”“This course is simple because I do not need to write notes or to obtain learning materials
e.g. sticks, stones. All learning materials are provided or drawn on the computer does notneed a teacher to write on the chalkboard. So a lot of work can be covered within a period
given. When it comes to exams, it reduces the problem of exam leakages or cheating
because each and every learner is given one computer and marking is done by thecomputer itself. Grading and receiving of marks is done at the same time within a shortperiod of time, rather than waiting for some days to receive the marks.”“I STRONGLY Agree, that it is, an effective way of teaching the core element, since, it issimple than other methods.”“I liked this course because: It helped me to know more before being taught in class.”

59

“Yes, since it is more advanced as it will be able to address the shortages of teachers
especially in rural areas in schools. And the system is easy to those who are serious andeager to learn.”“I liked very much the e-Learning course since I was gaining two things at once The system
has also substituted the task of writing notes in the exercise books and it attracts theinterest of the learners.”“Yes, I would recommend this mode because student teachers can address these concepts
to rural areas. And can benefit if they are serious to develop rural areas.”“My feelings and general impressions about this asynchronous e-learning is that it is very
good and important mode of training. It also consumes a lot of time; hence it requires a lotof asynchronous learning for it to be successful and efficient.”“I learn at the right time I want to learn.”“I have enjoyed this system of learning and I don’t take this for granted.”“I feel so good and attentive whenever I am learning using this type of learning and I've
liked it so much that I could wish to be taught in this way as far as mathematics isconcerned.”vi) Contrary views about asynchronous e-Learning
On a negative note, few participants reported the following about asynchronous eLearning:“No, I do not like asynchronous e-Learning because it is advantageous to quick learners
only .It is time consuming due to black outs and unavailability of internet at times.”“No, asynchronous e-Learning is not good because it will be difficult for slow learners to get
information and understand properly.”“No, I did not like it just because learning using this course is very faster .So it is difficult forslow learners to get the points.”

60

“No, asynchronous e-Learning is not good. It is difficult for slow learners to get information.
They need to be directed by the teacher for them to get information.”“Asynchronous e-Learning is not very good just because it needs electricity.”“It is very beautiful kind of learning but we lack guidance as to how we can apply
knowledge to solve some problems.”“My feeling on asynchronous e-Learning is that try to make a lenient circle in order foranybody having a wish to participate should gain the treatment equally. It takes more for a
subject to be covered since the equipments are not enough to be used by the whole class.”“When there is no network the lesson will be disturbed and you are not able to ask question
to your teacher directly and being answered at the same time.”“It needs electricity all the time so makes it impossible to learn when there is a power failure.
If there is a question to ask you have to wait for the answer as it will require you to send themessage first. Shortage of computers was another problem.”“The bad part of this type of learning was frequent black outs. This led to unnecessary
stoppages of lessons. It is not environmental friendly as it can easily be affected by power
black outs.”“Some points needed clear interpretation by the lecturer which was not there because weused our own times to use the e-learning system.”“The part of asking questions to a teacher directly since we were mostly being advised to
ask it by just sending an email or through Friendster bulletin board since in most cases it
was not convenient.”“Asynchronous e-Learning is difficult to someone who is less intelligent because it
promotes self –learning. There is also a network problem since it needs the use of acomputer.”

61

The above remarks by some participants imply that instructional designers and instructors
should always bear in mind that learners are not the same. What appears to be simple toone learner may not be simple to another learner. This calls for thorough researches to findout how all learners can be accommodated in e-Learning courses. As for teachers, it is very
important to ensure favourable learning conditions are put in place. An e-Learning course
must state clearly what is required of the learner for him /her to complete his/her course
successfully.

The qualitative data of this study shows that majority of participants indicated that theasynchronous e-Learning course and discussion board offered them greater opportunity to
fully participate in all learning activities. In other words, majority of participants felt theasynchronous e-Learning is a very good tool for learning how to teach. The evidence isfound in their comments about how they viewed learning from online (refer to participants’comments above). Observation of participants during this study indicated that most of themhad the freedom to express themselves and make contributions towards the learning
process by either asking questions or making a comment to their colleagues’ postings.
Some indicated in their responses to a questionnaire that asynchronous discussion board
and emails gave them an opportunity to learn from each other through their postings andthat even those participants who are too shy to ask or respond to questions were able to
make contributions (refer to participants’ comments above) through the discussion board.
In this case, it means the asynchronous discussion board makes everyone to feel free tomake a contribution whatever its quality could be. In other words, in a face to faceclassroom, some learners do not make contributions for fear of being laughed at or
reprimanded by other students.

Some participants indicated that it was important for them to learn online because it offeredthem an opportunity to move with the changing world.

62

However, a handful of participants were of the view that asynchronous e-Learning could notafford them the opportunity to get immediate clarifications or feedback on some areas fromtheir instructors and/or fellow learners whenever need arose (refer to Appendix 13).

To sum up everything, this research revealed very strong support from teacher trainees(participants) for the asynchronous e-Learning delivery mode but mixed with serious
concerns about the impact of shortage of computers and frequent black outs on theirstudies. The other concern is on the college to respond to the new demands of technology
given the available resources. The participants’ support was frequently justified with theirpraise for the usefulness of asynchronous e-Learning as a tool for learning. To arrive atthese conclusions, the following factors were taken into consideration. Table 4 below
shows how data was analysed.

Table 4: criteria used for data analysis
Criteria for analysis
Frequency of a particular response
Consistency of responses

Data collected and analysis
What majority said about a situation
Two or more groups of interviewees giving
similar responses at the same timeAmount of influence of the person who madethe response

Was the response coming from the intended
participants?

Changes in data over a period of time

Participants’ performance changing afterusing asynchronous e-learning for sometime

Criticality of the information to the success of
e-learning in the institution

Concerns and recommendations about elearning mode of training

Students’ perceptions of the value of their interactions with others in asynchronous
discussion board significantly influenced their interests in using the computer as a learning
tool. This means that pre-service teacher trainees need to perceive a discussion board as atechnology that does not only provide quality postings but serves as a social space forremoving loneliness, interaction, and learning from each other. The participants had
positive views of the contributions of their peers because, despite the variety of activities,
they shared a common endeavor in the sense that all activities related in one way or
another to learning to teach.

634.3 Quantitative data analysis
The research also compared participants’ tests (pretest, midcourse, and posttest) grade
results in a class that was taught by the same instructor using face-to-face and online
delivery modes. The effectiveness of an asynchronous e-Learning can be determined bymeasuring the extent to which the course objectives have been achieved as well as
participants’ reactions after they have gone through a course. In short, test scores wereused to collect quantitative data from both online and face to face participants. The aim wasto verify the effectiveness of asynchronous e-Learning by analysing and comparing theparticipants’ performance in the face to face and online modes. Table 5 below shows
average gains for one to one, small group and field trial participants.
Table 5: average scores for one to one, small group and field trial participantsParticipants/Test
One to one
Small group
Field trial (experimental)

Pretest44.63 (SD = 6.28)
44.00 (SD = 13.76)
48.54 (SD = 13.91)

Posttest
60.00 (SD = 20.17)70.75 (SD = 15.94)
61.67 (SD = 10.04)

Table 6 below shows average net gains and between subjects t-test scores for pretest andmidcourse test results.

Table 6: average net gains and t-test score for average pretest and midcourse test
results.
Group/test
Mean score- face to face
Mean score -online
participants
Difference in net gains
Standard
erroronline
participantsStandard error- face to faceparticipants
t-test score

Pretest39.86% (SD = 13.49)
48.54% (SD = 13.91)

Midcourse test
62.44% (SD = 13.50)
73.59% (SD = 4.86)

2.14

1.01

2.19

2.29

t (75)= 2.83
p< 0.01t (75)= 4.58
p< 0.01

Net gain
22.58%
25.05%
2.47%%

From table 6 above, the difference between the average net gains between pretest and midcourse test results was 25.05% - 22.58% = 2.47% in favour of asynchronous e-Learning
participants (the experiment). This is the net score attributable to the asynchronous eLearning course because all other factors were the same for both experimental and control

64

groups. Therefore, the overall net gain due to the asynchronous e-Learning delivery was
only 2.47% which is slightly significant.

A further analysis of table 6 above indicates that the standard deviation for pretest scores
was 13.91 for online and 13.49 for face to face participants with a t-test score of T (75) =2.83, P< 0.01. The pretest standard deviations for the two groups show that the spread of
the pretest scores in both face to face and online tests was almost the same. Based onthese statistical figures, it means there was a slight difference in initial knowledge about thecourse content for the two groups, face to face and online participants. Also from table 6
above, the net gain due to the e-Learning course was only 2.47%. The midcourse test
standard deviation was 4.86 for online and 13.50 for face to face with standard errors of
1.01 and 2.29 respectively with a t-test score of T (75)= 4.58, P< 0.01. The standard
deviations show that the grades in face to face participants were more spread than in
online participants. However, the midcourse test t-test score show that there was a slightdifference in learning achievements between face to face and asynchronous e-Learning
participants. Table 7 below shows the average net gains and between subjects t-testscores for pretest and posttest results.

Table 7: average net gains and t-test score for pretest and posttest results.
Group/test
Average score -face to face
Average score-online
participants
Difference in net gains
Standard
erroronline
participantsStandard error- face to faceparticipants
t-test score

Pretest39.86% (SD= 13.49)
48.54% (SD = 13.91)

Posttest
64.29% (SD = 10.29)
61.67% (SD = 10.04)

2.14

1.56

2.19

1.72

t(75)= 2.83
p< 0.01t(75) = 1.13
t> (0.05)

Net gain24.43%
13.13%
11.30%An analysis of table 7 above shows that the difference in the average net gains between
pretest and posttest results was 24.43% – 13.13% = 11.30% in favour of face to faceparticipants (the control group). This is the net score attributable to the face to face course65because all other factors were the same for both experimental and control group. Therefore
the gain due to face to face course was 11.30%. Also the posttest standard deviation was
10.04 for online and 10.29 for face to face with standard errors of 2.14 and 2.19
respectively and a t-test score of T (75) = 1.13, P> (0.05). The standard deviations showthat the grades in face to face participants were more or less spread in the same way as inonline participants. The posttest t-test score is below the standard t-test value and therefore,shows that there was no significant difference in learning achievements between face toface and asynchronous e-Learning participants. Table 8 below shows an overall net gain
and between subjects t-test scores for face to face and asynchronous e-Learning
participants based on average scores of the midcourse test and the posttest results.

Table 8: population average results and between subjects t-test of test scores
Type ofparticipants/average
score
Online participants
Face to face participantsStandard error –online
testStandard error- face toface test
T-testpretestMid
test

48.54%(SD = 13.91)
39.86%(SD = 13.49)
2.14

courseposttest(Mid course +posttest) ÷ 2

73.59%(SD = 4.86)
62.44%(SD = 13.50)
1.01

61.67%(SD = 10.04)
64.29%(SD = 10.29)
1.56

67.63%(SD = 5.50)
63.37%(SD = 13.23)
0.98

2.19

2.29

1.72

1.70

T(75)= 2.83,
P< 0.01

T(75)= 4.58
P<0.01

T(75)= 1.13
P> 0.05

T(75)= 2.61
P = 0.01

4.3.1 Discussion of quantitative data analysis
Table 8 above shows that the overall standard deviations (for the average scores of
midcourse test and posttest) were 5.50 and 13.23 for online and face to face participants
respectively with standard errors of 0.98 and 1.70 and a t-test score of T(75)= 2.61, P =(0.01). The standard deviations show that overall grades in face to face participants weremore spread than in online participants. The overall t-test score is equal to the standard ttest value with a probability error of about 0.05. Therefore, statistically, this shows that
there was no significant difference in learning achievements between face to face andasynchronous e-Learning participants

66However, a further comparison of the average test scores of one to one, small group andthe field trial participants shows a downward trend in performance despite several revisions
and improvements of instructional material (Refer to appendices 9, 10, and 11). This wasdue to the fact that 10 computers had to be shared by 40 field trial participants, unlike in
one to one and small group scenario where each participant had a computer of his/her own.
The implication here is that the field trial group was deprived of adequate time to study
online.

Based on the statistical figures from tables 5, 6, 7 and 8 above, there is no proof that morelearning took place in asynchronous e-Learning than in face to face mode of delivery(Kirkpatrick pp9-10). An analysis of both the average net gains and between subjects t-testscores on posttest grades for both face to face and asynchronous e-Learning modes ofdelivery which were used to determine if a significant difference existed show thatasynchronous e-Learning is as effective as face to face mode of delivery. This is evidenced
by both the average net gains of 25.05% and 13.13% respectively for online participants
against 22.1% and 23.95% for face to face participants with a t-test score of T (75) = 2.61,
P = 0.01.

The online participants were prevented from scoring higher grades than expected due tothe following reasons; (i) limited study time- the computer laboratories were open for themfor a maximum of 2 hours only each day whereas face to face participants had books withthem all the time. In this regard, the face to face learners had more time to study outsideclassroom time than the online participants, (ii) frequent black outs- this prevented online
participants from studying but face to face learners were not affected, and (iii) slow typing
speed- due to slow typing speed, it was not possible for some participants to finish theirassignments within the allocated time of their study. As a result, they submitted unfinishedtasks leading to low grades.

From the three factors outlined above, it is evident that the face to face participants had
more studying advantages over the online participants. The online participants managed to67

achieve more or less the same as face to face participants. However, given equal
opportunity and adequate amount of time, the online participants might have achieved
higher grades than in face to face training. Despite the asynchronous e-Learning
participants facing problems with their studies, they still achieved a lot, which meantlearning took place. Therefore, asynchronous e-Learning is at least as effective as face toface learning or possibly more effective if all necessary conditions are provided.

4.4 Experimental Problems during the study
Problems faced during research activities while participants were interacting with the
instructional material were as follows: all participants were computer illiterate, the internet
was very slow due to small bandwidth (about 32 gigabits), frequent internet and power
failures, and too few computers (10 only for about 60 participants). These problems
resulted in limited study time for online participants. Most participants were forgetting theirpasswords for accessing instructional material and Friendster bulletin board. Some wrote
their assignments using Microsoft Word and could not know how to send their postings on
the discussion board. All participants had very slow typing speed. All the above problems
were with regard to the ICT infrastructure and trainees’ ICT skills.

68Chapter 5
Conclusion
5.1 Summary of findings
This research has shown that there is no significant difference in learning achievements
between face to face and asynchronous e-Learning delivery modes. This assertion has
been proved by analysing the overall average net gains and t-test score of T (75) = 2.61, P= 0.01 for the online and face to face participants’ average posttest results. Additionally,
online mode of delivery does very well when measuring student satisfaction, andenthusiasm about learning achievements. The results show that the asynchronous eLearning material could enable effective learning and that the combination of emails andforum facilities could be a fair substitute for face to face interaction. Based on the findingsof this study, pre-service teacher training can be done through asynchronous e-Learning.

From participants’ reactions, it has been noted that there are many advantages ofasynchronous e-Learning such as development of critical thinking by learners as they learn
from each other, learners are given the opportunity to create their own knowledge, anddevelopment of confidence in the learners that learning can take place even when there isno teacher. For a successful and attractive asynchronous e-Learning instructional material,
all the dimensions of interactivity should be accommodated. The instructional material
should allow for:1. Learner –material interaction: this is possible with the inclusion of quizzes, shorttests and exercises with immediate feedback by the learning system.
2.

Learner – learner interaction: forum facilities should be provided for where learners
will exchange ideas by reading and commenting on their colleagues’ work.
Learners should be made to see the advantages of learning from one another.

3. Learner – instructor interaction: it is also important to give learners an opportunity tohave their instructor’s feedback on their learning progress. All in all two way
communication should be promoted in asynchronous e-Learning.

69

In ideal conditions, the research participants needed to be exposed to equal opportunitiesof study time, and other learning resources, but this was not the case with my research.
The online participants had a lot of experimental problems such as power and internet
failures, inadequate computers, limited study time in the computer laboratories and slow
internet. This meant that the face to face participants had a lot of advantages over online
participants in terms of study time, and resources. In other words, when there was noelectricity, face to face participants continued learning. Similarly, 10 computers were
supposed to be shared by 40 field trial online participants within a limited time. Despite theexperimental challenges outlined above for the online participants, the findings of thisresearch show that they had almost the same achievements in terms of performance as
face to face participants (refer to Appendices 11 and 12).

Asynchronous e-Learning is possible and desirable in Malawi teacher training programmes
based on the following reasons:•

All teacher training colleges have computers (though inadequate) and areconnected to the internet (though very slow).

•

Teacher trainees are ready and enthusiastic to learn through online.

The uniqueness of my research was that it was the first time to conduct a research of thiskind in the history of elementary (primary) school pre-service teacher training colleges inMalawi. Furthermore, the participants in this research were real pre-service teacher
trainees unlike in other researches where simulations are used.

5.2 implications and limitations of this research
The findings in this study show positive implications for asynchronous e-Learning in Malawi.
It shows a bright future for asynchronous e-Learning. The results of this research haveshown that asynchronous e-Learning mode of delivery can be effective and can havepositive impacts on the way pre-service teacher trainees learn to teach. Furthermore,
students’ perception of their own learning in asynchronous e-Learning mode of delivery isvery encouraging. This is shown by students’ positive remarks that they would have loved if70they continued learning mathematics online. They also expressed their willingness to workon their own first before an instructor comes in.

Teacher training colleges and faculty should realize that technology has become “anexternal extension of human intelligence” (Gura & Percy, 2005, in Ajayi, 2009) with apotential to support pre-service teachers’ active exploration and manipulation of learningmaterials, and create contexts for social interactions that support knowledge construction.
In particular, online interaction provides learners a community of practice with the potential
for “cognitive and affective development and opportunities for growth as independent
learners” (Kayler & Weller, 2007, in Ajayi, 2009). The Malawi Ministry of Education is
advocating for learner centred education which can easily be achieved by asynchronous eLearning. In this regard, this paper calls for approaches that integrate asynchronous eLearning into pre-service teacher preparation in ways that increase the capacity of teacher
training colleges, and enhance the quality of instruction and learning.

Such approaches should raise some fundamental questions, including: (a) What is theimpact of asynchronous e-Learning on the way pre-service teachers learn to teach? (b)What are the students’ perceptions of their own learning in asynchronous e-Learning modeof delivery? (c) How do they want to experience learning? (d) How do teacher educators
want them to experience learning?

The limitations of my research using mathematics course are that the findings may not be
automatically relevant to other subjects. The other limitation is that the research was
carried out in one college only (Kasungu Teachers Training College) out of the five teacher
training colleges in Malawi. It is not automatically guaranteed that what worked for thecollege will work in the same way for the other colleges.

5.3 Challenges for Malawi with regard to asynchronous e-Learning:
Millions of Malawian people still cannot access the Internet and do not understand how to
use it to harness the global web of knowledge. They do not know how to deal with digital71

information, the basic currency of the knowledge economy. They do not know how to findinformation, how to handle it, how to trade in it, and how to invest it. In this regard,
challenges include:•

Need for greater access to broadband connectivity•

Need for guidance in the best uses of the Web for learning•

Understanding of how people learn differently with the Internet•

College administrators and teaching staff have little understanding of “what is
possible with the technology and how to make it happen” [Gura and Percy, 2005,(in Ajayi, 2009)].

•

Most teacher trainees and college instructors have little or no IT knowledge andskills.

•Need for instructional designers who can design and develop online courses.

If asynchronous e-Learning was introduced in Malawi today, the immediate problems
learners would face would be inadequate computers at each teacher training institution
coupled with very slow internet, daily blackouts and Internet interruptions.

5.4 Future plan for e-Learning
In future research it is the author’s intention to investigate how efficient asynchronous eLearning is. In particular, I will gauge the degree to which the pre-service teachers
demonstrate how they will be applying the knowledge and skills gained from asynchronous
e-Learning in their day to day work as elementary school teachers, the extent to which they
have made progress toward meeting the new standards, and the degree to which they
have received adequate support and professional development. One suggestion might beto pilot Web-based learning in a few teacher training colleges, before trying to initiate anational program. Such a pilot project would not only allow teacher training college
administrators to experience the process of developing or adapting content for the Web, it
would also allow them to evaluate mechanisms for assessment, feedback, and student
support. To further evaluate limits of the innovation, another suggestion for those charged
with teacher training would be to look at alternative models of pre-service teacher trainee
evaluation.

72

References
Ajayi, L. (2009). “An Exploration of Pre-Service Teachers’ Perceptions of Learning to Teach
while Using Asynchronous Discussion Board, Educational Technology & Society”.
Retrieved online on 8th December, 2009 at http://www.ifets.info/journals/12_2/7.pdf

Allison, R. (2002). How to keep e-Learners from escaping, the ASTD e-Learning Handbook(pages 218 -233). Mc Graw-Hill Co. Inc. United States of America.

Allison, R. (2002). Mission e-possible, the Cisco e-Learning Story. The ASTD e-Learning
Handbook (pages 507-509). Mc Graw-Hill Co. Inc. United States of America.

Brewer, S., & Klein, J. (2006). “Types of positive interdependence and affiliation motive inan asynchronous, collaborative learning environment. Educational Technology”.

Springer

Boston.

Retrieved

onlineon

8th

January,2010athttp://www.springerlink.com/content/n8277j17wv68r4u0/

Broadbent, B. (2002). The Challenge to Get it Right, e-Learning Fundamentals, ABCs of eLearning, (pages 10-15, 125-127). New York: United States of America.

Chiwaya, M. et.al, (2007). Initial Primary Teacher Education Programme- Programme
Handbook. Malawi Institute of Education. Zomba.

“Educational Reform and Teacher Professional Development”. Available online. Retrievedon 1st July, 2009 at http://www.vancouver.wsu.edu/programs/edu/swep/research.html

73Erkan, et al (2006). A Blended e-Learning Environment, a Model Proposition for Integrationof Asynchronous and Synchronous e-Learning, the International Journal of
Learning. Retrieved online at
http://www.clomedia.com/features/2008/July/2276/index.php“E-Learning Consulting (2009). Synchronous e-Learning”. Retrieved online on 4th January,
2010 at http://www.e-learningconsulting.com/consulting/what/synchronous.html

Heinich, R. Molenda, M. Russell, J. & Smaldino, S. (2002). Instructional Media andTechnologies for Learning (7th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall

Hettiarachchi, E. “Online learning”. Retrieved online on 8th December, 2009 at
http://fi.wikiversity.org/wiki/Enosha_Hettiarachchi

Horton, W. and Horton, K. (2003). Types of e-Learning and the Technologies Required: ELearning Tools and Technologies, (pp.13-24). Indianapolis: Canada.

Hrastinski, S. (2008). “Asynchronous and Synchronous e-Learning”. Retrieved online on 7thJuly, 2009, EDUCAUSE Quarterly, vol. 31, no. 4 (October–December 2008v) at
http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/EDUCAUSEQuarterlyMagazineVolu
m/AsynchronousandSynchronousELea/163445

Kairi (2003). A Review of Teacher Education and Professional Development in MalawiFinal Report. Malawi Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. Lilongwe.
Malawi.

Kirkpatrick, D.L. (1998). Another Look at Evaluating Training Programs, (pp 9 – 10).
American Society for Training and Development. Alexandria. United States ofAmerica.

74

Morrison, G.R. et al (2004). Designing Effective Instruction, (4th edition). John Wiley & Sons,
Inc. United States of America.

Piskurich, G.M. (2003). Designing Asynchronous e-Learning, the AMA Handbook of eLearning (pages 255 -265). Amacom. Unites States of America.

Stephenson, J. (Ed.). (2001). Teaching & learning online, new pedagogies for new
technologies. London: Kogan Page.

Strauss, A. L. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research, Grounded
Theory procedures and techniques. Newberry Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Suzuki, K. (2002). Instructional Design. Retrieved online on 6th December, 2009 athttps://cas.kumamoto-u.ac.jp/ce6.

Suzuki, K. (2004). E-Learning Fundamentals Textbook, chapter 3. Retrieved online on 6th
December, 2009 at https://cas.kumamoto-u.ac.jp/ce6.

“Types of e-Learning. Available online”. Retrieved online on 18th May, 2009 at
http://www.worldwidelearn.com/elearning-essentials/elearning-evaluation.htm

75Appendices: test scores, questionnaires, observation forms and test items.
Appendix 1
Entry test for both face to face and asynchronous e-Learning participants
Before you study this course, we would like to find out if you have the required prerequisiteknowledge. The aim of this test is to determine whether you have good knowledge ofMathematics or not. The passing mark is 65%. If you score less than 65%, you will not beallowed to study the course. You will be allowed to take this test once only. After
submission of your answers, you will immediately receive feedback on how you have
performed in the test. The instructional material will open for you only if your score is 65%
and above. Answers to this test are available and will be accessed after submission of yourresponses. Good luck!!!

1. The cost price of a unit of umbrellas is K3000 and the selling price of eachumbrella is K320.00. How much was the profit?

K 200.00
K 2 680.00
K 840.00
No profit was made2. in a meeting of 60 participants, 40 are women. What percentage of theparticipants are men?
66.67%
50%
33.33%
20%
3. Solve the following pair of simultaneous equations: 2x - y = 8, 3x + y = 17

x = 5, y = 2
x = 2, y = 576x = 9, y = 10
x = 4.83, y = 5
4. Rain falls to a depth of 3 centimetres on maize field whose area is 7 000
square centimetres. Calculate the volume of the rainfall in litres.
21 000 litres
21 litres
2333.3 litres
2.3 litres
5. Find the median in the following set of numbers: 1, 3, 3, 5, 1, 2, 2, 4, 3
1
2.67
3
2
6. Mary spent half of her money on biscuits and half of the remainder on sweets.
If she still had K105.00 left, how much money did Mary have at first?
K315.00
K0.00
K210.00
K420.00
7. Find the simple interest on K12000.00 for 8 months at 15% per annum
K14 400.00
K144 000.00
K1 200.00
K12.008. Mr. Kwerengwe's body mass increased by 15%. He then went on a diet andreduced his body mass by 15%. What can you say about his final body mass?

77His final body mass was the same as the original because the increase and decrease
cancelled each other.
His final body mass was 2.25% less than the original mass.
His final body mass was 2.25% more than the original mass
All answers above are correct.
9. in an aptitude test, 45% of the candidates failed. If there were two morecandidates who passed the test than those who failed, find the total number ofcandidates who passed the test.
11
55%
20
9
10. Simplify: 5xy -2y -3xy -4y +4x +5x
13xy
5y
5x
2xy - 6y + 9x
11. What is the value of zero (0) in the following number; 7 309 739?
Zero
Ten thousand.
it has no value since zero means nothing.
Zero thousand.
12. In an examination, 16 boys averaged 68% and 14 girls averaged 71%. What
was the average mark for all the pupils?
69.4
69.5

78

4.64
1 041
13. Factorise completely: ac + ce - ad - de.
(c + d)(a - e)(c - d)(a - e)(c - e)(a + d)(c - d)(a + e)
14. Take away the sum of 3 601 and 6907 from the product of 245 and 68
13 35419 966
19 9726 152
15. Write the next number in the following series of numbers; 2, 5, 11, 23...
47
35
34
26
16. Arrange the following fractions in ascending order; 3/8, 5/6, 7/12 and 2/3.
2/3, 3/8, 5/6, 7/12
5/6, 2/3, 7/12, 3/8.
7/12, 5/6, 3/8, 2/3.
3/8, 7/12, 2/3, 5/6.
17. Write one million, seventy nine thousand and eight in words.
1 798
1 079 008

79

1 709 008
1 790 008
18. Write 895.0987 correct to one significant figure.
8
9
895.1
900
19. The cost price of a bicycle is K2500.00. If it is reduced by K750.00, find theratio by which the price is reduced.
10:3
10:7
3:10
7:10
20. Find the Lowest Common Multiple of 24 and 44.
264
4
180
198

Appendix 2: Online entry test results question by question
Question*Full Mark

NumberAnswers

Q.1
Q.2

5
5

Q.3
Q.4
Q.5

of

Average Mark

Percentage

57
57

4.9
4.6

98%
91%

5
5
5

57
57
57

4.3
4.6
3.7

86%
91%
74%

Q.6

5

57

3.9

78%

Q.7
Q.8
Q.9

5
5
5

57
57
57

1.1
0.8
3.2

22%
16%
64%

80

Q.10
Q.11
Q.12
Q.13

5
5
5
5

57
57
57
57

5.0
4.1
0.8
4.9

100%
81%
16%
98%

Q.14

5

57

5.0

100%

Q.15

5

57

5.0

100%

Q.16
Q.17

5
5

57
57

3.3
4.5

66%
90%

Q.18
Q.19
Q.20

5
5
5

57
57
57

1.8
1.2
4.8

36%
24%
96%

Average Score

71.7%

Appendix 3
Pre-test for both face to face and asynchronous e-Learning participants
The aim of this pre-test is to determine how much knowledge you have on teaching of
numbers and basic operations. The passing mark for the pre-test is 65%. You will,
therefore, not be allowed to study this course if your score is 65% and above. Answer all
the questions. Submit your answers by pressing the 'submit' button below. Your grade willappear as soon as you have submitted your responses. Good Luck!!!

1. What is the difference matching and comparing objects in prenumber
activities?
Matching means looking at similarities and differences of objects while comparing
means suiting or fitting objects.
Comparing means looking at similarities and differences of objects while matchingmeans suiting or fitting objects.
Matching means looking at similarities and differences while comparing means
arranging objects according to a given condition or pattern.
Comparing means suiting or fitting while matching means putting objects of the samekind together.

81

2. 481 - 296 can best be taught to children by using;

SticksPlace value chart
spike abacus
Place value box
3. The reason for my choice in number 2 above is because;
Sticksarelocallyandeasilyfound

withintheschoolenvironment.

A place value chart can easily be drawn by the teacher or the children themselves.
A spike abacus uses few objects and would, therefore, be convenient to use.
A place value box requires a lot objects and would, therefore, help learners to follow
the lesson easily.

4. Why is it important to face the chalkboard when demonstrating to children
writing a number in the air?
To let children know that in future all numbers will be written on the chalkboard.
So that all children who fear the teacher can learn comfortably.
The teacher takes the children's position and wants to show them the correct way anddirection of writing the number.
Some teachers are shy and would not be comfortable to face the children.
5. What is the name of the following; 3 + 5 = 8?
A number sentencean addition question.
Three plus five equals eight.
All of the above82

6. The prerequisite knowledge for teaching place values of numbers to childrenis;Pre-number activities.
Place value box.
Modeling numbers.
Knowledge of numbers
7. The value of 8 in 208 729 is;Eight thousand seven hundred and twenty nine.
One thousand.
Two hundred and eight thousands.
All of the above.
8. In what order would you teach the following pre-number activities; matching,classifying, sorting out and comparing objects?
Matching, classifying, sorting out, comparingclassifying, matching, sorting out, comparing.
Sorting out, classifying, matching, comparing
sorting out, comparing, matching, classifying.
9. The following are basic subtraction facts of 14 except;
14 - 8 = 6
14 - 9 = 5
14 - 6 = 8
14 - 4 = 10
10. A teacher taught addition of whole numbers to children using 2 + 1 = 3 as an
example. He followed the following steps;-placed two pencils and one leaf in two groups.
-Placed a correct number card below each group.
-brought the two groups together and asked the learners to find the total

83

number of objects.
-placed a number card below the new group.
-drew an illustration to represent the addition process.

Identify the mistake that the teacher made.
The teacher did not make any mistake because he followed the correct procedures of
introducing addition of whole numbers.
He used objects of different kinds
there was no need to place number cards below the groups.
The teacher did not ask questions to the learners.
11. In what correct teaching order would teach the following;(a) 65 - 34 (b) 15 - 7 (c) 8 - 5 (d) 35 - 17?
(c), (b), (a), (d)(a), (c), (b), (d)(c), (a), (b), (d)all at once
12. Study the following addition sentences; 0 + 3 = 3 and 3 + 0 = 3. This means
that;
Addition has both zero and commutative properties.
Addition has zero property only.
Addition has commutative property only.
Addition has both associative and commutative properties.
13. A teacher would determine if his/her children have mastered theunderstanding of numbers by involving them in the following activities except;
Picking a number card to match them with the number of objects.
Counting the numbers.

84Pronouncing the numbers
ordering the numbers correctly
14. Which of the following pre-number activities can best be taught by using 4bottles and 7 bottle tops;
Sorting out, classifying, matching, and comparing objects?

Matching
comparingclassifying
all of the above
15. Study the following subtraction sentence; 11 - 7 = 4. 11 is called:
Subtrahend
minuenddifference
addend
16. Place value of a number means;
Parts of a place value box.
The importance of a number.
A teaching and learning resource with compartments each representing the value of adigit in a number.
The value of a digit as it stands in a number.
17. How many addition facts does 15 have?
2
4
15
many

85

18. The reason why school children are taught addition first before subtraction
is because;
Subtraction requires knowledge of addition.
Addition is simpler than subtraction.
Children learn about addition while at home but they hear about subtraction when theycome to school.
Subtraction is very difficult for children so the teacher must wait for the children togrow up first.

19. A pupil worked out an addition question as follows;
237 + 156 = 383. What error did the pupil make?

He/she failed to add the numbers
did not regroup when it was necessary to do sohe/she did not arrange the numbers properly.
she/he didn't know which of the numbers addends were.
20. the number 0 is introduced after the numbers 1, 2, and 3 because;
0 is abstract and can only be introduced by subtraction
0 means nothing, so it cannot come first.
Children already know about 0 while at home so there is no need to waste timeteaching it first.
0 is not used most of the times so it is important to teach very useful numbers first.
21. A pupil was asked to take away 175 from 329. Write down all the subtraction
basic facts used by this pupil to solve the question.

22. Suppose a pupil in your class brought you 6 bean seeds and 4 empty
transparent bottles. Explain, in details, how you would use these materials to teachthe concept of '0' to your standard one learners.

86Appendix 4: Online pre-test results question by question
Question* Full Mark
Q.1
5

Number of Answers Average Mark
56
3.8

Percentage
76%

Q.2
Q.3

5
5

56
56

2.2
2.2

44%
44%

Q.4

5

56

5.0

100%

Q.5

5

56

1.2

24%

Q.6
Q.7
Q.8

5
5
5

56
56
56

1.0
2.9
3.1

20%
58%
62%

Q.9
Q.10

5
5

56
56

2.2
4.2

44%
84%

Q.11

5

56

3.0

60%

Q.12
Q.13

5
5

56
56

1.7
2.8

34%
56%

Q.14
Q.15
Q.16

5
5
5

56
56
56

1.8
0.9
2.9

36%
18%
58%

Q.17

5

56

0.4

8%

Q.18
Q.19

5
5

56
56

3.2
2.1

64%
42%

Q.20

5

55

2.6

52%

Q.21

5

56

1.6

32%

Average Score

48.54%

Appendix 5Mid-course test for both face to face and asynchronous e-Learning participantsThis examination is meant to test your understanding of units 1, 2, and 3. The passing markis 65%. You cannot open Block 2 if your passing mark is less than 65%. The grade you will
get from this test will be part of your continuous assessment. You will be allowed to submit
your answers only once. Upon submission of your answers, you will receive immediate
feedback on how you have performed. Answer all questions and then click the submission
button below this page. There are 20 questions in this paper.

1. Which of the following activities is not modeling of numbers?
Moulding numbers with clay soil
Use of objects to represent numbers.

87

Drawing numbers on the ground.
Use of number cards
2. Which of the following activities would you use when teaching recognition of
numbers to standard 1 children?
Moulding of numbers using clay soil
Use of objects to represent numbers
Drawing numbers on the ground
Use of number cards
3. Arrange the following prenumber activities in the correct teaching order;
matching, ordering, sorting out, classifying, Comparing.
matching, ordering, sorting out, classifying, Comparing
Sorting out, Classifying, Matching, Comparing, Ordering
Classifying, matching, sorting out, comparing, ordering
Comparing, classifying, sorting out, ordering, matching
4. Which teaching and learning resource is good to use when introducing placevalues of numbers?

SticksPlace value chart.
Spike abacus
Place value box
5. The reason for my choice in number 4 above is that;
Sticks can be easily found within the school environment.
Place value charts are easy to make since any piece of paper will do.
Place value boxes allow learners to see a true representation of the place values
Spike abacus uses few objects and therefore, easy to teach to children886. A teacher taught recognition of numbers to his standard 1 learners as follows;(1) held number card in his hand and asked learners to name the number on it.
(2) Asked the learners to name the number on the number cards.
(3) He let one learner name a number and then asks the other learners to pick a
number card bearing the mentioned number.
(4) The teacher provided number cards to all the learners.
Arrange the steps in the correct teaching order.
4, 2, 1, 3
1, 2, 3, 4
2, 3, 1, 4
3, 1, 2, 4.
7. Suppose you asked your learners to write the number 3 in their notebooks
soon after teaching it to them. Surprisingly, you found out that most of themwrote is as ε. What do you think might have been the problem?

Those who failed to write correctly were sleeping in class while I wasdemonstrating how to write 3 in the air.
I was facing them while I was demonstrating writing of 3 in the air.
Most learners in the class are left handed.
The learners did not have enough practice after the lesson.
8. When teaching about numbers, learners can be asked to arrange number
cards either in ascending or descending order if the lesson is on;Ordering numbers
writing numbers
recognizing numbers
conservation of numbers

89

9. What is the value of 0 in 509 381?
It has no value because 0 means nothing.
It represents thousands.
Ten thousand
0 thousand
10. What is a digit?
It is the value of a number.
Parts of a place value box
it is a symbol from which a number can be formed.
A finger or a toe of human beings or corresponding part of other vertebrates.
11. Which of the following is not a prenumber activity?
Classifying objects
Matching objects
Comparing objects
ordering numbers
12. When introducing numbers to children, which of the following activities
should come second?
Modeling, recognizing, pronouncing and writing numbers
Pronouncing
modeling
recognizing
writing
13. The prerequisite knowledge for teaching place value of numbers is;Place value box
numbers90

Spike abacus
counting
14. Real life situations where comparing can be used are as follows except for;
When people want to find the difference in amount or quantities of commodities.
If one wants to put things side by side.
When people want to find who has more or less objects.
When one wants to find out whether two quantities have the same value.

Appendix 6: Online mid-course test results question by question
Question* Full Mark

Number of Answers

Average Mark

Percentage

Q.1
Q.2

5
5

56
56

2.9
3.2

58%
64%

Q.3
Q.4

5
5

56
56

4.8
3.8

96%
76%

Q.5

5

56

3.6

72%

Q.6

5

56

4.3

86%

Q.7
Q.8

5
5

56
56

5.0
4.6

100%
91%

Q.9

5

56

4.6

91%

Q.10
Q.11
Q.12

5
5
5

56
56
56

2.7
5.0
3.0

54%
100%
60%

Q.13
Q.14

5
5

56
56

0.1
3.6

2%
72%

Average Score

73.59%

Appendix 7
Posttest questions for both face to face and asynchronous e-Learning participants.
The aim of this post test is to determine how much knowledge you have acquired onteaching of numbers and basic operations after going through the course. The passing
mark for the post test is 65%. Answer all the questions. Submit your answers by pressing
the 'submit' button below. Your grade will appear as soon as you have submitted your91

responses. You will be allowed to take this post test once only. The time allowed for thistest is 2 hours. Good Luck!!!

1. What is the difference between matching and comparing objects inprenumber activities?
Matching means looking at similarities and differences of objects while comparing
means suiting or fitting objects
Comparing means looking at similarities and differences of objects while matchingmeans suiting or fitting objects.
Matching means looking at similarities and differences while comparing means
arranging objects according to a given condition or patterncomparing means suiting or fitting while matching means putting objects of the samekind together.

2. 481 - 296 can best be taught to children by using;
Sticksplace value chart
spike abacus
place value box
3. The reason for my choice in number 2 above is because;
Sticks are locally and easily found within the school environment.
A place value chart can easily be drawn by the teacher or the children themselves.
A spike abacus uses few objects and would, therefore, be convenient to use.
A place value box requires a lot objects and would, therefore, help learners to follow
the lesson easily.

92

4. Why is it important to face the chalkboard when demonstrating to children
writing a number in the air?
To let children know that in future all numbers will be written on the chalkboard.
So that all children who fear the teacher can learn comfortably.
The teacher takes the children's position and wants to show them the correct way anddirection of writing the number.
Some teachers are shy and would not be comfortable to face the children.
5. What is the name of the following; 3 + 5 = 8 ?
a number sentencean addition question
three plus five equals eight
all of the above

6. The prerequisite knowledge for teaching place values of numbers to childrenis;Pre-number activities
place value box
modeling numbers
knowledge of numbers
7. The value of 8 in 208 729 is;Eight thousand seven hundred and twenty nine.
One thousand.
Two hundred and eight thousands.
All of the above.
8. In what order would you teach the following pre-number activities; matching,classifying, sorting out and comparing objects?

93Matching, classifying, sorting out, comparingclassifying, matching, sorting out, comparing.
Sorting out, classifying, matching, comparing
sorting out, comparing, matching, classifying.
9. The following are basic subtraction facts of 14 except;
14 - 8 = 6
14 - 9 = 5
14 - 6 = 8
14 - 4 = 10
10. A teacher taught addition of whole numbers to children using 2 + 1 = 3 as an
example. He followed the following steps;-placed two pencils and one leaf in two groups.
-Placed a correct number card below each group.
-brought the two groups together and asked the learners to find the total
number of objects.
-placed a number card below the new group.
-drew an illustration to represent the addition process.

Identify the mistake that the teacher made.
The teacher did not make any mistake because he followed the correct procedures of
introducing addition of whole numbers.
He used objects of different kinds
there was no need to place number cards below the groups.
The teacher did not ask questions to the learners.
11. In what correct teaching order would you teach the following;(a) 65 - 34 (b) 15 - 7 (c) 8 - 5 (d) 35 - 17?

94

(c), (b), (a), (d)(a), (c), (b), (d)(c), (a), (b), (d)all at once
12. Study the following addition sentences; 0 + 3 = 3 and 3 + 0 = 3. This means
that;
Addition has both zero and commutative properties.
Addition has zero property only.
Addition has commutative property only.
Addition has both associative and commutative properties.
13. A teacher would determine if his/her learners have mastered the concept ofnumbers if they are able to do the following activities except;
Picking number cards to match them with the number of objects.
Counting the numbers properly.
Pronouncing the numbers correctly
ordering the numbers correctly
14. Which of the following pre-number activities can best be taught by using 4bottles and 7 bottle tops?
Matching
comparingclassifying
all of the above
15. Study the following subtraction sentence; 11 - 7 = 4. 11 is called:
Subtrahend
minuend95

difference
addend
16. Place value of a number means;
Parts of a place value box.
The importance of a number.
A teaching and learning resource with compartments each representing the value of adigit in a number.
The value of a digit as it stands in a number.
17. How many addition facts does 15 have?

2
4
15
many

18. The reason why school children are taught addition first before subtraction
is because;
Subtraction requires knowledge of addition.
Addition is simpler than subtraction.
Children learn about addition while at home but they hear about subtraction when theycome to school.
Subtraction is very difficult for children so the teacher must wait for the children togrow up first

19. A pupil worked out an addition question as follows;
237 + 156 = 383.
-What error did the pupil make?

96

-suggest a reason why the pupil made this error.
-how would you assist the pupil so that he/she doesn't make a similar error in future?

20. A pupil was asked to take away 175 from 329. Write down all the subtraction
basic facts used by this pupil to solve the question.

21. Explain how you would use a spike abacus to teach place values of 609 to
your grade 3 learners. In your explanation, include both the materials and themethods you would use.
22. Suppose a pupil in your class brought you 6 bean seeds and 4 empty transparent
bottles. Explain, in details, how you would use these materials to teach the conceptof '0' to your standard one learners.

Appendix 8: Online posttest results question by question

Q.1

5

NumberAnswers
55

Q.2
Q.3

5
5

55
55

3.5
3.5

70%
70%

Q.4

5

55

4.9

98%

Q.5
Q.6

5
5

55
55

3.5
1.1

70%
22%

Q.7

5

55

3.8

76%

Q.8
Q.9

5
5

55
55

4.5
4.9

90%
98%

Q.10

5

55

4.9

98%

Q.11
Q.12

5
5

55
55

3.5
1.5

70%
30%

Q.13

5

55

1.8

36%

Q.14

5

55

4.1

81%

Q.15
Q.16

5
5

55
55

4.0
3.6

80%
72%

Q.17

5

55

1.9

38%

Q.18
Q.19

5
5

55
55

4.0
3.4

80%
68%

Q.20

5

55

2.1

42%

Q.21
Q.22

10
10

55
55

3.4
4.7

34%
47%

Question* Full Mark

of97

Average Mark

Percentage

4.3

86%

Average Score

61.67%

Appendix 9: online one-to-one participants’ test scores
Participant

Entry test

PretestStudent 1
Student 2
Student 3
Student 4
Student 5
Student 6
Student 7
Student 8
Average score

65
70
65
75
70
65
80
65
69.375

42
47
52
33
47
52
42
42
44.63

Mid
test
71
71
85
50
78
71
71
85
72.75

coursePosttest
77
75
69
21
41
57
61
79
60.00

Appendix 10: online small group participants’ test scores
ParticipantStudent 9
Student 10
Student 11.
Student 12
Student 13
Student 14
Student 15
Student 16
Average score

Entry test
70
75
70
85
70
70
70
85
74.375Pretest
23
28
66
52
47
42
42
52
44.00

Midcourse
57
57
71
78
64
71
78
64
67.5

Posttest
39
69
87
76
81
76
56
82
70.75

Appendix 11: online field trial participants’ test scores
ParticipantStudent 17
Student 18
Student 19
Student 20
Student 21
Student 22
Student 23
Student 24
Student 25
Student 26
Student 27
Student 28
Student 29
Student 30
Student 31
Student 32
Student 33
Student 34
Student 35
Student 36

Entry test
65
70
65
80
70
75
65
65
65
80
65
65
70
75
65
65
80
75
65
65

98

pretest
42
66
33
42
47
76
23
57
57
47
52
57
42
23
38
38
57
61
52
52

midcourse
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
78
71
64
71
71
71
85
71
71

posttest
73
58
66
65
72
64
58
62
60
71
60
49
58
50
62
65
66
71
79
37

Student 37
Student 38
Student 39
Student 40
Student 41
Student 42
Student 43
Student 44
Student 45
Student 46
Student 47
Student 48
Student 49
Student 50
Student 51
Student 52
Student 53
Student 54
Student 55
Student 56
Average score

85
75
70
80
80
70
65
65
70
70
85
80
75
70
70
75
80
80
70
45
71.25

52
61
33
57
66
19
71
47
38
47
38
66
33
52
57
52
57
52
33

78
78
71
71
85
78
78
71
78
85
78
74
71
78
50
71
78
78
85

54
60
58
71
52
55
57
77
38
78
70
74
64
61
50
57
56
57
70

48.54

73.59

61.67

Appendix 12: Face to face participants’ test scores
ParticipantStudent 57
Student 58
Student 59
Student 60
Student 61
Student 62
Student 63
Student 64
Student 65
Student 66
Student 67
Student 68
Student 69
Student 70
Student 71
Student 72
Student 73
Student 74
Student 75
Student 76
Student 77
Student 78
Student 79
Student 80
Student 81
Student 82
Student 83
Student 84
Student 85

Pretest
24
33
33
46
19
43
23
14
38
42
43
43
48
29
33
52
62
24
38
67
24
48
48
57
48
62
48
33
33

Midcourse
79
64
71
43
71
64
36
57
57
50
50
64
79
64
79
50
93
50
36
71
50
64
50
64
50
86
57
57
64

99

posttest
56
67
72
79
40
62
43
78
63
50
63
65
65
71
73
56
48
66
66
64
58
73
67
84
65
63
64

Student 86
Student 87
Student 88
Student 89
Student 90
Student 91
Student 92
AVERAGE GRADE

33
24
38
52
62
38
33
39.86

50
64
79
64
71
86
64
62.44

65
58
84
73
67
57
61
64.29

Appendix 13: Online participants’ questionnaires and responses
Questionnaire
Now you have come to the end of this course. Please tick the response which best fits youropinion or impression about this course and its mode of delivery. Your responses will not
be shared with anybody. There will be no score assigned to this questionnaire, hence, noeffect on your continuous assessment grade. You are advised not to be influenced by yourcolleagues' opinions.

* 1. Previous knowledge of the instructional material is important in taking an elearning course.

One to one participants
1: Strongly
agree

2: agree

3: disagree

60

4: strongly
disagree

5: undecided020Small group participants
1: Strongly
agree

2: agree

3: disagree3

1

4: strongly
disagree

5: undecided
0

40

Field trial participants
1: Strongly
agree

2: agree

3: disagree18

4

4: strongly
disagree

5: undecided
0

17

0

100

* 2. Taking an e-learning course will give me more flexibility than a traditionalclassroom course

One to one participants
1: Strongly
agree

2:

agree 3:50disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagreeundecided030Small group participants
1:
agree

Strongly 2:

agree 3:40

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagreeundecided

040Field trial participants
1: Strongly
agree

2: agree

3: disagree17

4

4: strongly
disagree

5: undecided
0

16

2

•

3. An e-learning course will be more convenient for me than a traditionalclassroom course.

One to one participants
1: strongly agree 2:25agree 3:

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree1

undecided00Small group participants
1: strongly agree 2:3

3

agree 3:

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree101Field trial participants

101

undecided1: strongly agree 2:
1121agree 3:

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree7

undecided

00* 4. There is higher interactivity with fellow students as well as lecturers than inface to face mode.

One to one participants
1: strongly agree 2:
13

agree 3:

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree3

undecided

10Small group participants
1: strongly agree 2:04agree 3:

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree3

undecided

01

Field trial participants
1: strongly agree 2:411agree 3:

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree19

undecided32* 5. After the e-learning course, I will need an instructor to teach me the samecontent.

One to one participants
1: strongly agree 2:12agree 3:

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree4

undecided01

Small group participants
1: strongly agree 2:03agree 3:

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree

5

0
0

102

undecided

Field trial participants
1: strongly agree 2:3

14agree 3:

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree23

undecided

03* 6. I expect anybody learning through this mode to perform better than one
doing face to face

One to one participants
1: strongly agree 2:2agree 3:

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree2

undecided

10Small group participants
1: strongly agree 2:25agree 3:

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree1

undecided

00Field trial participants
1: strongly agree 2:
1215agree 3:

disagree 4: strongly
disagree85:undecided3
1* 7. If I continued learning using asynchronous e-learning, my performance inclass would improve.

One to one participants
1: strongly agree 2:
1

4agree 3:

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree210Small group participants

103

undecided1: strongly agree 2:2agree 3:

4

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree0

undecided

11

Field trial phase participants
1: strongly agree 2:
10agree 3:20

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree7

undecided

20* 8. Given the chance to choose the mode of training, I would go for asynchronouse-learning

One to one participants
1: strongly agree 2:2agree 3:

5

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree1

undecided00Small group participants
1: strongly agree 2:
43

agree 3:

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree0

undecided

01

Field trial participants
1: strongly agree 2:
1320

agree 3:

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree5

undecided

10* 9. I like asynchronous e-learning because it gave me a lot of opportunity tomake contributions during the learning process

One to one participants
1:
agree

strongly 2:

agree 3:2

3

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree
0

3

0

104

undecidedSmall group participants
1:
agree

strongly 2:

agree 3:30

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagreeundecided

131
Field trial participants

1:
agree

strongly 2:

agree 3:

disagree 4:strongly 5:
disagree16

11

undecided

0

13

3

* 10. To what extent would you recommend this type of learning to a friend?

One to one participants
1:

excellent 2:

good 3:average 4:poor 5:

2

4

2

0

0

very

poor

very

poor

very

poor

very

poor

Small group participants
1:

excellent 2:

good 3:average 4:poor 5:

3

4

1

0

0

Field trial participants
1:

excellent 2:

good 3:average 4:poor 5:

13

16

10

0

0

* 11. How do you rate the e-learning mode of delivery?

One to one participants
1:
3

the

best 2:

good 3:average 4:poor 5:

4

1

0

0

105

Small group participants
1:

thebest 2:

good 3:average 4:poor 5:

2

2

0

0

best 2:

good 3:average 4:poor 5:

15

10

0

0

4

very

poor

very

poor

very

poor

very

poor

very

poor

Field trial participants
1:

the

14

* 12. How effective and efficient is this mode of training?

One to one participants
1:

excellent 2:

good 3:average 4:poor 5:

0

7

1

0

0

Small group participants
1:

excellent 2:

good 3:average 4:poor 5:

3

3

1

0

1

Field trial participants
1:

excellent 2:

good 3:average 4:poor 5:

8

22

9

0

0

13. What are your feelings and general impressions about asynchronous elearning?

Reactions from one to one participants:
Student 1
It is fun and fast.

106

Student 2
I fell if this mode of training should continue to others too
Student 3
My feelings on asynchronous e-learning are try to make a lenient circle in order foranybody having a wish to participate should gain the treatment equally. It takes more for a
subject to be covered since the equipment is not enough to be used by the whole classStudent 4
I HOPE ITIS VERY HELPFUL IN LEARNING THE CORE ELEMENT
Student 5
I feel happy
Student 6
my feelings is that I have learn more things and is goodStudent 7
my feeling and general impression about asynchronous e-learning is not sogood because there is no discussion between learners and a teacher.
Student 8
My feelings and general impressions about this asynchronous e-learning is that it is very
good and important mode of training. And I feel to have more chance of learning a lot
through this mode of training.
Reactions from small group participantsStudent 9
It is very good but not 100 percent
Student 10
I am over the moon to come across this type of learning.
Student 11
I am more creative than before and have more interest to learn more.

107

Student 12
I am very happy with e-learning in the way that I have already learnt more things than myfriends who are waiting to be taught in class.
Student 13
I am feeling comfortable/well, according to my feelings andgeneral impressions about asynchronous e-learning.
Student 14
Excellent.
Student 15
I have enjoyed this system of learning and I don't take for granted
Student 16
It is very beautiful kind of learning but we lack guidance as to how we can apply
knowledge to solve some problems
Reactions from field trial group.
.Student 17
one is able to learn a lot within a short period of time
Student 18
I need to learn more about other programs on the computer
Student 19
I feel free and effective
Student 20
my feelings are so good and I am impressed.
Student 21:
brilliantStudent 23
It better to use this mode of e-learning since learners are fully participating.

108

Student 24
It is good because it makes a learner to think critically on tasks given other than justrelying on a teacher all the time.
Student 25
ENJOY
I ENJOY THE IT AND IT GIVES A DESIRE OF LEARNING
Student 26
the asynchronous e-learning increases my self esteem.
Student 27
It's good because the learner is able to do the work on his/her own and freely.
Student 28:
I FEEL MUCH BETTER AND IS FLEXIBLE.
Student 29
it is not really good and it is not really bad but its average because it needs electricity andnetwork so where there is no this no learning noStudent 30
i learn in write time i want to learn
Student 31
very impressed especially with detailed notes
Student 32
This method of learning is very good because the learner uses his or her knowledge
when dealing with work given to do and this also improves the thinking capacity of alearner.
Student 33
i feel goodStudent 34
A synchronous e-learning is just okay109

Student 35
It is a very good mode of study and enjoyable
Student 36
It is quite better because a learner has got an opportunity of the modern way of learningthen it is good.
Student 37
good but not perfect
Student 38.I am really feeling good and impressed by asynchronous e-learning course
Student 39
am glad with the learning system because am now familiar with the computer.
Student 40
It encourages individual work rather than group work which is common in face to facemode of delivery. It also consumes a lot of time; hence it requires a lot of asynchronous
for it to be successful and efficient.
Student 41
I have felt happy to be one using e learning and this method is good compare with othermethods.
Student 42
goodStudent 43
it is the best way of learning than to se a teacher because some how you may a sleep inclass while a teacher is teachingStudent 44:
I feel so good and attentive whenever I am being taught using this type of learning andI've liked it so much that I could wish to teach in this way as far as mathematics isconcerned.

110Student 45
Have good feelings and general impression
Student 46
I take it as a very a very good learning course and i insist the lecture to continue using it
because it has a lot of advantages than disadvantages
Student 47
asynchronous e_learning is not good because it has no time to questioning the teacher
Student 48
It is good and it maintains attention through out the lesson
Student 49:
Not good to shy learners
Student 50
It is very easy to understandStudent 51
It is very good and ok.
Student 52
it is not very good just because it need electricity
Student 53
i feel good, since it is a fast way of learning
Student 54
I feel not good
Asynchronous e-learning is good and it can help somebody to pass with flying colour.
Student 55
my feelings and general impressions about asynchronous e-learning is that I wish if I
could use this type of learning throughout my life so that my life could benefit a lot fromthis type of learning since it involves the use of technology which is now popular
nowadays.

111

Student 56
To have my own computer•

14. In your opinion, what do you think was the good part of this mode oflearning?

One to one participants’ opinions
Student 1
because we know more about it.
Student 2
I need not to be in a classroom all the time
Student 3
It simplifies the work in the sense that the work which would cover a
week is covered in two days.
Student 4
1.quiz2.compering of my answer which i have contribute during lesson
3.making system is very fast
4.There is no favouritism or discrimination during learning process
5.effective to shy learners
Student 5
According to my views all the parts are so good /nice/fantastic and well understandable
parts.
Student 6
it is well explainedStudent 7
Equipments should be added with good necessities.
Student 8
WE ARE INVOLVING OURSELVES IN TECHNOLOGICAL USE

112

Small group participants’ opinions
Student 9
It allowed me to go to another phase/lesson only if I passed the test.
Student 10
The teacher was so friendly and this made the learning environment
Student 11
One can learn at his own time due to some other busy things
Student 12
It provide me with knowledge and skills, because full / enoughinformation of mathematics.
Student 13
The good part of this e-learning is that I was able to know more things before being taught
by the teacher. So during class time I will be just adding where I did not understand well.
Student 14
The teacher was so friendly and the class was quit.
Student 15
Presentation and briefing was well molded and ordered
Student 16
Learners may learn all the topics which a teacher has planed to teach without any
disturbances like absenteeism of a teacher or a learner.
Field trial participants’ opinions
Student 17
The good part was o0nly getting the knowledge of how a computer works
Student 18:
no answer
Student 19:
notes are good113

Student 20
I learned and know many things through this type of learning
Student 21
The internet has the best part I have learnt.
Student 22
i have gained some knowledge of using computer.
Student 23
All parts of this mode of learning are good.
Student 24
the good part of this mode of learning is that it encourages reading skills and it makes
student teacher to memorize what he was doing on the previous course
Student 25
everyone is participating
Student 26:
All were good
Conducive.
Student 27
I do make some contributions without any disturbances
Student 28
The good part is that learners be willing to study through this mode.
Student 29
it is friendly as it is promoting self reliance to students
Student 30:
The good part of e-learning mode is that.
(1) It gives an opportunity to learners to contribute ideas while learning is in process.
(2) It is more convenient to learners.
(3) It is more flexible.
(4) It is not time consuming

114

Student 31
The good part was the notes presentations
Student 32
The good part was it's presentation since it was strongly attracting our attention.
Student 33
More work is covered for a short period of time.
Student 34:
LEARNERS FEEL FREE WHEN LEARNING SINCE THERE IS NO ANYDISTURBENCES IN TERMS OF NOISE
Student 35
the good part of this mode is demonstration.
Student 36
mathematics
Student 37
WHEN WRITING EXERCISE YOU NO LONGER TAKE MUCH TIME TO KNOW THE
RESULT.
Student 38
All parts are goodStudent 39
If properly planned it is fast mode of delivery. It also assists one to gain some knowledgeof computer.
Student 40
it saves time, it is fast and effective.
Student 41:
every part was good since it clearly shows me convenient information
Student 42
Mostly when demonstrating numbers using place values, abacus.

115

Student 43
everything was just goodStudent 44
the good part of this learning is that it creates a critical thinking among learners since it
attracts full attention of the operator.
Student 45:
1. the assessments i.e. quiz and tests
2. How to teach pre numbers, addition of whole numbers and subtraction numbers
3.promotes fast learning the use c
Student 46
Time can be saved
Student 47
In my opinion, the good part of this mode of learning was that I was free to express myviews to my lecturer and classmates whether positive or negative because it was not face
to face contact.
Student 48:
It is good because it helps learner to part and parcel among those, who uses computers.
Student 49
we learn more things at short period of time.
Student 50:
according to me it was addition and subtraction of whole numbers but only time forreading notes and to copying them.
Student 51
yes
Student 52
methodology.Student 53
easy to understand116

Student 54
The teaching area whereby a teacher was speaking [teaching].
Student 55:
to me the operation of the computer was very interesting

Student 56
Everything was interesting* 15. What was the bad part of this type of learning?
One to one participants’ responses
Student 1
it is bad because of net work
Student 2:
it needs electricity all the time so makes it impossible to learn when there are power
failures. If there is a question to ask you have to wait for the answer as it will require you
to send the message first.
Student 3
There were no real objects for demonstration that learners could see
Student 4
1. NO practise
2.You not given a chance to ask question
3.It is easily affected by other techniques
Student 5
Assuredly I didn’t found any part which is bad. And if I will get something wrong whichmeans I will just forgotten.
Student 6
difficult to get points

117

Student 7
No any part was bad since what we were trying to cover is in our syllabus.
Student 8
THE BAD PART OFTHIS TYPE OFLEARNING IS THAT IT TAKES MORE TIMEMASTERING THE MACHINE.
Small group participants’ responses
Student 9
some typing mistakes were found in the learning.
Student 10
the bad part of this type of learning was perpetual black out.
This led unnecessary stoppages of lesson
Student 11
It fail short of some explanation hence not effective unless otherwise
Student:12
nothing
Student 13
the bad part was that I was not able to understand other things because they need to beclarified by the teacher.
Student 14
the bad part of this type of learning was perpetual black out
this lead to unnecessary stoppages of lessons.
Student 15
lack reference for acquisition of further knowledge
Student 16
the bad thing is learners have no chance of asking question where they met withproblems or where they not understand.
Field trial participants’ responses

118

Student 17
the learning is too fast
Student 18
you are not able to ask question to you teacher and being answered at the same time
Student 19
it is tiresome
Student 20
when there is no network the lesson will be disturbed
Student 21
to me I don’t think there is any part I don’t like, everything was quite ok.
Student 22
slow learn is a problem
Student 23
NowhereStudent: 24
no any bad part of this type of learning
Student 25
shortage of computers
Student 26
there was no bad part
.Student 27
it increases cheating because learners do study question before answering it
Student 28
I do not see any bad part.
Student 29
it is not environmental friendly as it can easily be affected by power black outs
Khondiwa Samuel: 30
The bad part of e-leaning is that,119

(1)since learning is done on the computer, there would/will be a problem of learning if
there is no internet.
(2)There would be a problem of learning if there is black out
Kalua John: 31
some points needed clear interpretation by the lecture which was not there
because sometimes we used our own times to use this systemStudent 32
The part of asking questions to a teacher since we were mostly being advised to ask it byjust sending an email since in most cases it was not convenient.
Student 33
No demonstration to the learners.
Student 34
IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND YOU FACE PROBLEMS BECAUSE YOU DO NOTHAVE ANY CHANCE OF ASKING THE QUESTIONS
Student 35
it is lecturing.
Student: 36
no bad partStudent: 37
THERE IS NO CHANCE OF QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS AT THE TIME.
Student: 38
All are goodStudent 39
It is time consuming
Student 40
not effective for slow learners.Student 41
there was no bad part120

Student 42
When giving information and reasoning were a bit low.
Student 43
nothing
Student 44
the bad part was that it leads to delays in cases of internet failure. Minus that, this type oflearning is very fine.
Student: 45-it is difficult to someone who is less intelligent because it promotes self -learning-network problems since it need a use of computer
Student 46
Learners do not have time ask
Student 47
The bad part of it was that it becomes difficult to practice in field because nowadays wework in the field where we find no access of computers.
Student 48
It bad because learners do not have chances of asking at the same time hence it only
help quick learners more than slow learners.
Student 49
we do not have time to question where we do not understand.
Student 50
to me it was teaching place value and introducing numbers.
Student 51
not all partStudent 52
nothing
Student 53
it takes more time to know the computers for those who do not know

121Student 54
Nothing.
Student s: 55
failing of the computer to operate an activity was bad* 16. What are some of the things that you liked about e-learning as a mode ofdelivery?
Student 1
I developed skills and knowledge through computer
Student 2
the teacher does not need to go around looking for material to use for demonstration
when teaching e.g. bottle tops, sticks, and place value charts
Student 3
1. Few resources are needed.
2. It saves time
3. It reduce cheating
Student 4
1.To be given a chance to ask
2.We should have a chance to practiseStudent 5
these are; 1.the practical are in good stages.
2. The demonstration is very well understandable.
3. It provides to me some skills in computer.
Student 6
I like the way it explained the sentenceStudent 7
I've added some of the knowledge which I had never had

122Student 8
SOME OF THING ARE SKILL AND TEACHING METHODS OF THE CORE, EL`
ELEMENTS.
Small group participantsStudent 9More explanation of the content.
Student 10
the quietness of the class room.
Equal treatment from the teacher.
Student 11
I like much in this mode of delivery because it has changed me from computer illiterate tocomputer literate.
Student 12
I would like to have a Degree in mathematics though e-learning as a mode of delivery.
Student 13
some of the things are; 1.Opening of mail address in the computor.2.Learning before
being taught by the teacher.3.the computer learning.
Student 14
This type of learning creates the chance for me to know something
about computer.
. Student:15
when we have questions relating to what we have learnt there is need for rapid response
Student 16
Learning without disturbances like unnecessary noise from fell students.
Field trial participants’ responses
Student 17
it is only good for the quick learners

123Student 18
you develop some skills and knowledge of computer
Student:19
it makes learners to be active in researchingStudent: 20
I like to do so activity and to know what it woks.
Student 21
Sending E-mails to friends, knowing how one has faired in an exam at the same time an
E-mail is sent to a teacher.
Student 22
u can learn the lesson though the teacher is out of the campus.
Student 23
ALL
Student 24
you can access any where you are in the world
Student 25
To learn more about power point
Student 26
all things
Student 27
I want the teacher to give only one chance to open the question paper
Student 28
i need to find other subjects through this mode.
Student 29
detailed notes
Student 30.The use of computer which increases our knowledge and skills, since we are using a welladvanced technological equipment.

124

Student 32
The presentation of resources itself made the understanding of the lessons
Student: 33
The presentation the computerized notes which completely attracted our attention plus
the double benefit of computer knowledge and academic knowledge.
Student 34
I am exposed to the computer software e.g. Microsoft word and it is quick method ofdelivery.
Student: 35
WE SHOULD BE GIVEN MORE TIME FOR STUDING IN ORDER TO CACH UP ALL
IMPORTANT POINTS
Student 36
demonstration, answering question
Student 37
the teacher should be shown writing when teaching isStudent 38
IWOULD LIKE TO LEARN AS IT IS AND GIVE ME A CHANCE TO KNOW MOREABOUT COMPUTER.
Student 39
I like all the things
Student 40
the access to computer
Student 41
as in mathematics i would have liked if it was possible for one to make some calculations
using the same computer [not multiple choice]Student 42
short and direct information

125

Student 43
doing the work, reading myself.
Student 44
Some of the things i liked in e learning mode of delivery are: it helps me as a learner to,know how to use a computer and it also improves thinking capacity of the learner.
Student 45
some of the things I liked in this mode of delivery were the presence of Quiz after thelearning Unit, this increases my fast thinking ability.
Student 46
1.the use of computer
2.self learning since you understand on your own
Student 47
More examples
Student 48
Some of the things that I liked were, continuous assessment which were being given tome through quiz which helped me to be alert on knowing the areas and topics the exams
might come from and lastly it assisted me in becoming familiar with the computer in thatthrough doing the exercise, I knew how to write frequently on the computer.
Student: 49
Supervision during the operation.
Student 50
there should be another teacher who will be support the learners where they do notunderstand.
Student 51
you should give enough time to leadStudent 52
all

126

Student 53
learning at advanced stage
Student 54
more computers
Student 55
Written notes and tests.
Student 56
clearly arranged information since the Lecture took a time in arranging the information* 17. What are some of the things that you did not like about e-learning as a modeof delivery?

One to one participants’ responses
Student 1
things that I did not like are that in many times net wok is a very big problem.
Student 2
It needs somebody to use his thinking capacity all the time so that should be able tointerpret the message properly.
Student 3
1.pour connection of internet
2.no face to face discussions of internet
Student 4
1.few questions
2.few examples
3.multiple choice4.it never give chance to explain
Student 5
Nothing.

127

Student 6
it does not brings good looking pictures
Student 7
Time consuming
Student 8
THESE ARE SHORT NOTES AND SUMMARY.
Small group participants’ responses
Student 9
Nothing.
Student 10
I was not interested with that blackout
Student 11
Time consuming unless one an expert in typing.
Student12
No chance of asking oral questions to the teacher. Few resources e.g. only few
computers used for many people. At times, i went back because i found the computerroom fully packed
Student 13
IT makes a student not to have notes that can be used where ever he goes. In theabsence of computer cannot be practised.
Student 14
The black out.
Student 15
nothing any
Student 16
Disturbances due to little number of computers as other learners who were coming did
not give chance to their friends.

128

Field trial participants’ responses
Student 17
it is not good for the slow learners
Student 18
it is difficult to use it when there is no network
Student 19
it needs research that’s too much to me
Student 20
It is not easy to do the lesson when there is no electricity
Student 21
There were some minor problems like the blackouts & intervention of other classes(strangers) was giving tough time to us.
Student 22
interaction between learners and teacher is slow.
Student 23
Nothing
Student 24
nothing because is a good mode of delivery
Student 25
congestion in the computer lab because we get confused because of noiseStudent 26
nothing.Student 27
noise from other learners when am studying
Student 28
I do not want learners to repeat questions for many times.
Student 29
inadequate resources129

Student 30.Mode of delivery of e-learning promotes laziness to learners since there is no writing ofnotes and everything is provided.
Student 31
the charts were not enough to accommodate all the information explained in the lessons
Student:32
The part of asking questions to a teacher.
Student 33
Takes time for the learner to be assisted the same time since there is no direct contact
with a Lecturer.
Student 34
HAVING SHORT TIME FOR STUDYING AND WRITING
Student 35
no chance for asking questions when the teacher is teaching in this mode
Student 36
noisy
Student: 37
TIME SHOULD BE INCREASED.
Student 38
I like all the things
Student 39
It consumes time of other subjects due to inadequate computers
Student 40
inadequate resources thus computers
Student 41
demonstration by using long statements
Student 42
The steps to be taken to achieve this mode.

130

Student 43
You cannot ask questions. So this can make you to write both wrong and right things
since you can not be conversant with some of the things
Student 44
It needs some clarifications from the lecturer in some areas which i could not understandStudent 45
takes time master the work
Student: 46
Nothing is wrong
Student 47
The only problem I faced was that of electricity black out and shortfalls of network which
made some of the exercises not to be made accordingly.
Student 48
1.Noise 2.Misbehaving
Student 49
time for using this computer should be change because other learners they use long time.
Student 50
colour when you are teaching us with your computer
Student: 51
time consuming
Student 52
nothing
Student: 53
lacking computers
Student 54
Nothing.
Student: 55
Tiresome at the beginning if you do not know very well the computer131

* 18. Please, write down any comment you have about this course.
Comments by one to one participantsStudent 1
my recommendation is that have learn more things from this computer.
Student 2
It is good if possible we should continue to learn using this method.
Student 3
This course is not so bad and is not so goodStudent 4
This program is so good if you will correct some errors
Student 5
I am proposing this course that it is very good and profitable course. And my concept is toargue you that you may continue teaching us through this mode of delivery.
Student 6
it is well understandably and applicable and well seen
Student 7
No any comment.
Student 8
IT IS QUITE GOOD AND RELIABLE WAY TEACHING THE SUBJECT
Comments by small group participantsStudent 9
I had no more disturbances which improved my interest and allowed me to go to anotherphase only if I passed the test. Therefore it has been a good course
Student 10
The should proceed offering this type of learning.
Student 11
The world is changing technologically so the only way we can adapt to the world isthrough this mode of delivery.

132

Student 12
I am very happy being the one who is trained throughthis mode of delivery. I as a student I will try mybest to achieve my goals.
Student 13
This course has helped me to know more things within a short period of time. This is done
because of you our lecture. Through this course I have opened my mail address and I
have practised in the computer. Lastly I would like thank you Mr. Kwerengwe for providing
us with this course.
Student 14
This course was so good and enjoyable.
Student 15
the course was success and I have enjoyed it continue with the systemStudent: 16
I enjoyed this course very much.
Comments by field trial participantsStudent 17
it is not good for slow learners
Student 18
no comment
Student19
this course is so good to me
Student 20
E learning is very important because I know how to use computer
Student 21
This course is good only that it needs very organized people who understands when isthere time to be in the lab and when its not.

133Student 22
materials of this course are not locally found. Time consuming due to problem of blackout
and network. I disagree this mode.
.Student 23
This course is very good and nice i prefer it.
Student 24
i would wish this course to continue because is the best mode of delivery
Student 25
this course is good because it has assisted us to gain skills and knowledge of using
computerStudent 26
It is good since time management is enhanced
Student 27
this course is very important because i do get some information which is missing in ourhandbook. It improves resourcefulness among learners
Student 28
I need this mode to be continued.
Student 29
very good & and interesting
Student 30.The course is good only that the problem of internet and frequent power black out (Loadshedding) will not work efficiently.
Student 31
The course was just fine however the availability of proper functioning computers affected
us a lot
Student 32
It is good and help that it can improve somebody's knowledge but it has to be given much
time.

134

Student 33
I appreciate using the mode of delivery despite some limitations.
Student 34
COURSE IS VERY GOOD AND MORE ATTRACTIVE
Student 35
this mode is very good to fast learners but for slow learners is bad it need special help.
Student 36
the course is very fineStudent: 37
THIS COURSE IS VERY FLEXIBLE AND WE ARE GETTING SKILLS ABOUTCOMPUTER. PLEASE CONTINUE WITH THIS COURSE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
Student 37
It is so fineStudent 39
It should be managed properly for it to be successful.
Student: 40
this course would have been effective if the materials used were sufficient.
Student 41
proceed on giving us this course
Student 42
It good and nice it helps me to be motivated in other areas.
Student 43
This way of learning is important mostly because it is time saving and young can learn
things in a short period of time.
Student 44
This is very good mode of learning because someone may acquire information at a shortperiod of time than in a classroom where it is difficult to get whatever point the lecturer issaying because of presence of noise from class members

135Student 45
1.this should continue
2.friends should also learn through this course
3. Government should provide more computers for this learning system to be promoted
4.it is advanced way of learning
Student 46
I wish i will continue learning
Student 47
The course is just good and excellent
Student 48
This system of learning is partially good since other learners seem to know what to do but
in true sense they are not gain much knowledge.
Student 49
we should continue with course
Student 50
this course is good but it requires enough time
Student: 51
the system is goodStudent 52
very excellent I love it.
Student: 53
it has to continue it’s goodStudent 54
This course is good and is enjoyable one because apart from learning Mathematics I havelearned how to use a computer. Moreover, this kind of learning is faster and easier thanface to face.

136

Student 55
This is the best but the computer should be mastered first and also have the reliable
computer.

Appendix 14
Observation questions during participants’ interaction with the asynchronous elearning material•

Q: What attitudes did learners have towards e-learning before, during, andafter the e-learning activities?
A: Most learners had shown positive attitudes and interest in e-learning. Thiswas shown by their enthusiasm to learn. Most of them requested to continue
studying even if it was past midnight.

•

Q: What knowledge, skills, and attitudes did they acquire during the training?
A: Basic IT skills, teaching of numbers and basic operations, making andparticipating in discussions online, interacting with each other and instructors online,
respecting each others’ views, developed confidence that people can learn througha computer.

•

Q: How much did they participate?
A: There was very high participation by almost all participants despite electricity
and internet problems. However, few participants asked questions both to theirfellow students and the instructor. A discussion box was instituted. Participants
were also allowed to post questions on the discussion board.

•

Q: What was students’ interest in the lessons?
A: Layout of instructions, quizzes with immediate feedback, interacting with fellow
participants•

Q: What was the quality of their participation?
A: Very high. Contributions made were positive and highly assisted them toimprove their thinking ability.

•

Q: Is my organization ready for e-learning?

137

A: Not yet. This is evidenced by the following factors; all instructors are almost
computer illiterate, the institution has many computers but with a very small internet
bandwidth which can accommodate about five computers only. Funding for elearning activities is not there. The college managers feel e-learning is costly as
opposed to paper-based instructional materials.
•

Q: Are individual learners ready for e-learning?
A: Yes. This was evidenced by participants’ enthusiasm to continue learning
through e-learning. Some of them said they could be happy if they were given achance to learn through online.

•

Q: Is asynchronous e-learning best suited to my organization and to its
learners?
A: Yes.

•

Q: Explain your answer above.
There are computers and an internet connection although not reliable. The
institution cannot accommodate all students who apply for teacher training courses.
In addition, learners show great interest in e-learning.

•

Q: What techniques can e-learning instructor use to enhance theeffectiveness of training teachers?
A: Maximizing rate of interaction, i.e. making sure that learners get responses andother necessary information within a short time, providing questions which will lead
learners to think and improve their knowledge, providing opportunities for trainees
to practise what they have learnt.

•

Q: Did participants display positive attitudes towards this mode of delivery?
A: Yes.

•

Q: Explain your answer above.
A: This was shown by participants’ insistence to continue learning even during odd
hours.

•

Q: What problems were noticed as participants were interacting with thematerial?

138

A: Participants forgetting User IDs and passwords, failure to access otherparticipants’ postings so that they could read them and make their comments, some
wrote their assignments in word and could not know to send their postings, limited
time for studying as they were expected to attend all classes despite the online
course. Some failed to move the cursor to the desired icon/place.

•

Q: What might have been the cause of the problem?
A: IT was a completely new concept to all of them. Some may not have understood
why passwords and user ID were required.

•

Q: In which part(s) did the learners seek clarifications?
A: Learners sought clarification on computer operations and how they could viewand send mails postings from and to fellow participants. As for the instructional
material, all participants said they did not have any problems with the language,
quizzes and the examples given. However, they suggested that each lesson needs
enough examples so that learners should have a variety of them. They alsosuggested that pictures be increased to concretise some concepts.

•

Q: How were the learners assisted?
A: Those participants who asked for assistance on operating a computer wereshown how to do it.

•

Q: What was the participants’ reaction towards the instructional material?
A: Most of them felt the instructional material was far much better for self learning.

•

Q: Did the participants show easiness in using the instructional material?
Explain your answer.
A: Yes, this was shown as most learners completed the course without
asking any question for clarification despite my presence all the time. The only
questions that I received were those concerning computer operations.

Key:
Q: Question
A: Answer

139

Appendix 15
One to one and small group Formative Evaluation Questionnaire
Tick (√) the answer which best describes your opinion about this material.
Question

Yes

Somehow

No

Not
sure

Was the time adequate for learning thismaterial?
Were the examples given relevant to thecontent and course objectives?
Were the examples adequate enough to makeyou learn comfortably?
Did the examples and explanations clarify
concepts and new ideas?
Did you find this material helpful enough toassist you teach numbers and basic operations
comfortably and effectively?
Would you rate this material as good enoughfor self –learning?
Were explanations clear enough to make youlearn without problems?
Was the language used in this material
appropriate for self learning?
Did you face any problems with this
instructional material?
Does the content meet all the learning
objectives

Please, provide free responses to the following questions;
1. Whatisyouroverallratingof

thisinstructional

material?

__________________________________________________________________
2. What should be added and/or removed from the instructional material to make it
more effective?
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3. Does this instructional material have adequate information to enable a learnerunderstandconcepts

and

other

key

points?

Explainyouranswer.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

140

4. Which part (s), if any, of the instructional material should be modified? Explain how
it should be modified.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
5. Write any other comments that you have about this instructional material.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Appendix 16
Subject matter expert evaluation checklist for evaluation of e-Learning instructional
material.
Criteria

Objectives

Questions
Do they specify what is expected to be learnt in the course?
Are learning objectives clear and relevant?
Are they measurable?

Consistency
Real-world
ReinforcementCoursestructure

Are the e-learning and classroom lessons designed withsimilar elements?
Does the e-learning mimic real-world problems andenvironment?
Does the e-learning reinforce or support the learning thattakes place in the classroom?
Is the course presented in a logical format?
Are lesson units
pieces/chunks?

brokendown

intomanageable

Are directions clear?
Does feedback for questions appear on the screen near thequestion?
Do practice examples reinforce the learning objectives?
Are abstract concepts illustrated with concrete, specificexamples?
Do post-tests and other assessments adequately measureaccomplishment of the learning objectives?

141

Yes

No

Is the essential act of student interaction with faculty andother students facilitated through a variety of ways, including
voice mail and/or email?
Are diagnostic pre-tests available to help learners’ custom
tailor learning to their needs?
Instructional
designAre graphics and text relevant?
Is the text and/or narration conversational in style?
Where possible, does the e-learning use narration instead oftext to communicate content?
Where possible, does the e-learning use working examples
with real-world job tools and situations?
Does the e-learning promote self-questioning when learners
are learning for receptive e-lessons?
Does the e-learning use pre and post assessments tomeasure the levels of learning?
Does the e-learning allow learners to choose advanced or
beginner options based on their skill level and experience?
Was the content valuable enough to their learning?
Is the e-learning intuitive to use for learners who are new to
e-learning?
Are the icons clear and used consistently?

User interface

Do learners have to scroll down or can they access all of theinformation on their screen?
Are plug-ins avoided or available by easy download?
Can learners bookmark the site so they can quit and return
without losing their place?
Are help screens available to learners?
Is the e-learning accessible 24/7?
Are graphics and scenarios appropriate for a global
audience?
Does the e-learning avoid slang, jargon, or local phrases?
Does the e-learning
misinterpreted?

Appropriaten
ess

avoid

humor, which

could

be

Where possible, are icons used instead of buttons with text?

142

Does the e-learning allow space for translation if necessary?
Does the e-learning reinforce or support the learning thattakes place in the classroom or on the job?
Where possible, does the e-learning use working examples
with real world job tools and situations?

Content
criteria

Is the instruction accurate and current?
Does the course cover the subject in sufficient breadth anddepth to meet the objectives?
Does the content meet the course objectives, clear andadequate to enable learners answer all questions?
Is the course free from production errors, such as broken
links, missing graphics, and typographic errors?
Does each lesson give an overview?
Are the examples clear and adequate?
Are the questions appropriate?
Are learners given the opportunity to practice ideas andskills immediately after they are presented?
Does practice activities exercise knowledge and skills in a
way that prepares learners to apply learning to their jobs?

Practice andfeedback

Are practice activities provided to help learners integrate
separate bits of knowledge and low-level skills?
Is feedback in practice activities and tests sufficient to help
learners recognize and correct misconceptions?
Is the feedback to student assignments and questions
constructive and provided in a timely manner?
Are the questions clear and adequate to cover the wholecourse?
Can learners get started taking the course (locate it,register, access starting page) using only online assistance?

Usability
criteria

Is the combination of on-screen instructions and online help
sufficient for learners to learn to navigate and operate thecourse?
Is it clear what learners should do if they get stuck or havequestions?

143

Can learners predict the general result of clicking on eachbutton or link?

Media criteria

Is the text in the course written at a level that learners canfully understand?
Is text legible as displayed using default browser settingsand only default fonts?
Are graphics (illustrations, photographs, graphs, diagrams,etc) used appropriately?
Are multimedia content modules used where simple words
and pictures are not adequate to communicate visual andspatial concepts?
Do graphics and multimedia assist in noticing and learning
critical content rather than merely entertaining or possibly
distracting learners?
Will the course be accessible to those with visual andhearing impairments?
Can learners decide what parts of the course to learn, in
which order, and at what pace?

Navigation
andcontrol
criteria

Are navigation and access mechanisms (menus, browsing
trails, maps, indexes) sufficient that learners can findspecific items of content?
Are units self-contained enough that learners can take themout of sequence without becoming confused?
Do learners always know where they are?
By examining page titles, constantly displayed menus, orother location indicators, can learners deduce their current
location in the course?
Does the course initially make clear to learners what theygain by taking the course?
Does each lesson or other sizable unit make clear tolearners what they gain by taking it?
Will the difficulty of the course appropriately challenge mylearners—not too hard or too easy?

Motivation
criteria

Are students properly advised about the program before
they begin, to determine if they possess the self-motivationand commitment to learn at a distance and if they haveaccess to the minimal technology required by the course
design?
Are students provided with supplemental course informationthat outlines course objectives, concepts, ideas, andlearning outcomes for each course?

144

Appendix17: Sample of asynchronous discussion board work by online participants.

To:
Subject: Re: Assignment 2
Dear Prospelina,
I read your answers. Your arguments were not adequate more especially innumber 3. You need to check with your friends' work make necessary
improvements where possible. Your grade is 11/20.
Kwerengwe
Prospelina wrote:
2. These are number cards and charts with numbers.
3. A learners fail to regroup ones into tens. B learners fail to add regrouped
ones .c learners fail to add ones to tens and tens to ones. And tell them how to
put the ones and tens when they add numbers.

Message:

1. Because learners already know the object when they are still at home andit is not difficult to them to pronounce the numbers.
Stan wrote:
Post your answer to this bulletin board. Read any two postings from yourclassmates and make comments on them. Post your comments to thediscussion board. Marking will be done both on your comments andassignment. Good luck!!!
1. Why are objects used when introducing numbers to children for the firsttime?
2. Name any two materials you would use to help your learners remember
numbers.
3. What problems may learners face in the process of learning about additionof numbers? Name any three such problems and explain how you can assist
your learners to minimize making such errors.

To:
Subject: Re: Assignment 1
Your grade is 8/10. Good
Kwerengwe
Daniel Trouble wrote:
1. colour
lengthMessage: size
shapeheight2.i can bring similar object but differ in size/length then I will demonstrate toarrange objects then will ask learners to arrange object accordingly

145

Stan wrote:
1. Name any five attributes that can be used when teaching pre-number
activities.
2. Explain how you would teach ordering of objects to your grade/standard
one learners. In your explanation, include the teaching and learning resources
you would use and how you would evaluate your lesson.
About Us|Advertise|Blog|Classifieds|Developers|Press Center|Privacy|Terms
Copyright 2002-2009 Friendster, Inc. All rights reserved. U.S. Patent No. 7,069,308, 7,117,254, 7,188,153, 7,451,161 &7,478,078

146