Master's Dissertation First Full Draft

4.9. Research design

The research questions addressed by this experiment were investigated by means of both between and within-subjects quasi-experimental designs with contrast groups and without bona fide random assignment. The implementation of a within-subjects research design was attempted wherever possible, but where practical and logistical factors prevented this, a between-subjects research design was implemented instead. The fundamental design for each participant remained the same, with relatively minor variations across samples.

A range of largely practical factors determined whether (and to what extent) the between- or within-subjects designs were implemented. Among the most prominent of these factors were willingness to participate in more than one condition, availability of time slots at individual venues, and logistical and technical difficulties experienced while conducting the experiments. The extent and effect of these factors varied across sites and even across times, leading to only the between-subjects design being implemented at sites 5 and 6 and both the between- and within-subjects designs being implemented at sites 1, 2, 3 and 4.

At sites 2, 5 and 6 participants were ‘quasi-randomly’ assigned to a device condition (i.e. the research team assigned participants to device conditions, but without the aid of a mathematical tool to ensure randomness). At sites 1, 3 and 4, participants all completed the paper condition first, followed by the tablet condition a week later. Although this introduces the potential of order effects, it was not practically possible to balance device conditions at these particular sites. It was intended that all participants at these sites (1, 3 and 4) would complete two device conditions; however, attrition meant that a significant number of participants ended up completing only one of these conditions, thereby falling into the between-subjects design by default. Practical realities made random assignment difficult and this was therefore not successfully implemented. These various device conditions and reading/note-taking conditions represent contrast groups rather than control groups, further reiterating the quasi- rather than true experimental nature of this experiment. That being said, however, it is not clear and certainly not obvious whether a practically feasible control group condition is possible in this context. Furthermore, these contrast groups strongly correspond to real-world learning experiences, with many learners making use of one or more of these device- and reading/note-taking conditions as part of their regular academic activities.

4.10. Ethical considerations

An application for ethics clearance was submitted the Wits Human Research Ethics Committee (non-medical) – HREC (non-medical). In parallel, a research approval request was submitted to the Office of Knowledge Management and Research, Gauteng Department of Education (GDE). Approval was granted by the GDE (ref. no. D2016 / 178 GA) and ethics clearance was subsequently granted by the Wits HREC (non-medical) to conduct this research (protocol number H15/05/41). Four of the sites are public secondary schools. One of the stipulated conditions of the GDE research approval is that the GDE research approval letter be sent to the directors of these four districts. This was done via the district SSIP co-ordinators. Permission to conduct research was obtained from the principals or site managers at each site. One of the sites is a private school – written permission was obtained from the school principal.

Informed consent and assent.

Informed consent to participate was obtained prior to conducting research for participants above the age of majority (i.e. 18 years of age). School/site management and teachers at all six sites were informed of the need to obtain informed assent and consent (from parents if participants were younger than 18 and from the participants themselves if 18 years or older) to participate for learners below the age of 18 years. Researchers worked in conjunction with school/site management and teachers through available channels to distribute the necessary assent and consent forms to learners who wished to participate in the research. Learners were instructed to return them either to the researchers themselves upon their next visit to the site/school or to their teachers. Learners were given regular reminders both by the school, teachers and the researchers themselves to return these forms should they wish to participate in the research. In addition, participants were regularly reminded that they were under no obligation to participate in the research and that both consent and assent (if under the age of 18) was required for their participation in the research.

No disruption of teaching and learning.

The researchers involved in this project worked closely with school management and teachers at all six sites to structure and carry out this research so as to ensure that it caused no disruption to ordinary teaching and learning at any of these schools. In all six cases, the researchers made it clear to teachers and school management that one of the researchers’ obligations was to not disrupt ordinary teaching and learning and that teaching and learning were required to take precedence over the research experiments. In order to ensure the optimal use of time and resources (from the perspective of schools and learners), the researchers deferred to and were guided by school/site management and teachers in each case with respect to the timing and location of the research experiments.

Anonymity

The right to anonymity of all participants was protected as far as practically possible. All personal or identifying data which was captured as part of this research is stored on a password-protected laptop computer belonging to one of the researchers. Access to this information has been strictly limited to the researchers. Both the analysis and write-up of results is entirely anonymous, with all personally identifying data removed. The original data has been safely stored and will be destroyed after a period of 5 years has elapsed following the completion of the primary researcher’s Master’s thesis.

The nature of the research design used required participants to return after a period of one week in order to complete the experiment, which required a means of identifying participant notes/documentation. A labelling system using a unique anonymising code was developed for each participant, which is relatively easy for participants to generate and remember, allows identification of documentation as necessary while protecting participant anonymity. This code is based on the last three letters of participant’s first name, the last three letters of the participant’s surname and the participant’s grade (i.e. year of school study). This anonymizing system was implemented at sites 2, 3 and 5. This labelling system was altered slightly for site 6 by replacing the last three letters of the participant’s name/surname component with participant seat row and number. This was done for primarily practical reasons, although it also strengthened participant anonymity. At sites 1 and 4, participants struggled to properly implement this labelling system and as such some participants instead wrote their names or names and surnames on their notes and tests instead of the anonymising code. A number of steps were taken by the research team to ensure that the original documents (notes, tests etc.) were securely stored and transported so that only the research team was able to access and view these documents. During the process of data capturing, all participants (whether they had made use of the anonymising code system or had simply written down their names) were assigned a numerical code which allowed for the anonymous analysis of captured data.

Debriefing

Participants were made aware by means of the participant information sheet handed out that they would be able to direct any queries about the research to the principal researcher, whose e-mail address was provided on the sheet itself. Participants were also given the opportunity to ask questions at any point throughout the experimental process.

Right to withdraw at any time without penalty

Participants were made aware of their right to withdraw from participating in any of these studies via the participant information sheet and could withdraw at any point during the study without penalty.