Facing Difficulties In Learning Computer Applications

Facing Difficulties in Learning Computer Applications

EDU 776(Issues in Education) Research Project

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Masters of Arts in Education (Concentration in Adult Education)

Submitted by Najamuddin Mohammed Student Number

246244

Submitted to Dr. Sue DuFord (Project Instructor)

November 20 2007

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to determine how the factors of personal access time to computer technology and computer skills can lead to the fear of learning new computer applications from students in Central Michigan University's Master of Arts in Education cohorts 19 and 20 at Humber College. A survey questionnaire was administered and the results were analyzed to see how strong correlations exists between fear of learning new computer applications and the factors of access to computer technology, computer literacy and access to computer technology support.

It was discovered that there is a strong negative correlation between computer skills and the fear of learning new computer applicants. There was a moderate negative correlation between access time and the fear of learning new computer applications and finally there was a small negative correlation between factor of having adequate support and the fear of learning new computer applications. Spearman rank correlation statistical analysis methodology was used to determine if correlations did exists and strength of the correlations. Further research is needed on determining on how factors of computer skills, computer technology access and computer support are correlated.

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1: THE PROBLEM DEFINED…………………………………….………6 Background Statement ………………………………………………….……..6 Problem Statement…………………………………………………………...…7 Purpose of Study……………………………………………………………......7 Research Questions…………………………………………………………….8 Definitions of Terms………………….….……………………………………...8 Limitations of Study……………………..………………………………………9 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………….…10 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY……………………………………………….…….18 Population/Sample…………………………………………………………….18 Data Collection Method(s) …………………………………………….……..18 Data Analysis Method(s) ……………………………………………………..19 CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS……………………………………………….…….23 CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS…….32 Summary……………………………………………………………………….32 Conclusions…………………………….………………………………………35 Recommendations ……………………….………………………………...…36 REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………...37

2

APPENDICES………………………………………………………………...………..42 A: Letter Permission from Research Institution…………………………………………………………………….….42 B: The Research Questionnaire……………………………………………………....................43 C: Consent Form for Research Questionnaire………………………………………………………...………..44

3

LIST OF TABLES

2

Data obtained from research survey questionnaires part one……………19

3

Data obtained from research survey questionnaires part two…………….20

4

Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient: Testing for correlation between fear and access…………………………………………………………..……21

5

Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient: Testing for correlation between fear and skills…………………………………………………………..………22

6

Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient: Testing for correlation between fear and support…………………………………………………………..……25

4

CHAPTER 1: THE PROBLEM DEFINED Background Statement

Information technology is having a profound affect on aspects of education including the delivery of instruction through the use of new computer applications. It is essential all learners not only become familiar but very comfortable with information technology; especially, computer applications to become effective learners. There is a need to have transferable computer skills or literacy so learners can be comfortable and easily learn new computer applications. Research regarding computer literacy and fear of learning new computer applications has been done with members of cohorts 19 and 20, who have taken Masters of Arts in Education degree program through Central Michigan University at offsite location of Humber College.

The young learners between, who are between the ages of 18-24 years old, now entering post-secondary institutions have for the most part the familiarity and comfort level with information technology to learn new computer applications with out much fear or apprehension. However, the adult learners who are 25 years old and older for the most part are not as familiar or comfortable with information technology and have considerable amount of fear with trying to use information technology or when learning a new computer application.

This fear seems to be correlated with the level of competency they have with information technology and computer applications and the amount of access

5

time they have at home, work and at colleges/universities that they are attending. Research needs to be done to be determined how strong this correlation between access time, computer literacy and the fear of learning new computer applications is and what can be done with the results of the research to strategy to minimize the fear of learning computer applications among adult learners.

Problem Statement

There seems to be a fear of learning new computer applications among adult learners in college and university programs, and this fear of learning new computer applications seems to be linked to computer skills and lack of access time to computer technology at home and at college/university for adult learners. There is a need to discover the link between how computer skills and lack of access to computer technology can lead to the fear of learning new computer applications for adult learners.

Purpose of Study

The purpose of this study is to determine how the factors of personal access time to computer technology and computer skills can lead to the fear of learning new computer applications from students in Central Michigan University's Master of Arts in Education cohorts 19 and 20 at Humber College.

6

Research Questions This study seeks to answer questions whether there is a strong correlation between computer skills, access time and fear of learning new computer applications.

1. How strong is the correlation between computer skills and fear of learning new computer applications for members of cohorts 19 and 20, who have taken masters of arts in education degree program through Central Michigan University at offsite location of Humber College?

2. How strong is the correlation between access time and fear of learning of new computer applications for members of cohorts 19 and 20, who have taken masters of arts in education degree program through Central Michigan University at offsite location of Humber College?

Definition of Terms

Fear In the context of this paper the term fear is going to be equivalent to the anxiety.

Cohort “Groups of students who enroll at the same time and go through a program by taking the same courses at the same time” (Imel, 2002, p.1).

7

Information technology, Technology, Information tools All these terms are going to refer to both computer-based hardware and software.

Limitation of Study

Participants in this study will be restricted to students who are enrolled in courses in Central Michigan University Masters of Arts in Education with concentration in Adult Education program hosted at Humber College Institute of Technology & Advanced Learning in Cohorts 19 and 20. Students had to learn to use, at the very least two online computer applications WebCT and First Search, during their course work. Cohort members were surveyed within the time period of February 2007 to March 2007.

The researcher having being a colleague of the participants may be seen as a limitation in terms of the researcher having bias that may affect the findings, analysis and final results. However, researchers’ understanding and familiarity of participants experience can allow a better understanding of the relevant issues that have effect on the study. Another limitation of this study is that gender and socio-economic factors were not taken into consideration. In the long term gender and socio-economic do not seem to play critical part when it comes to

8

students and how access time and computer skills fear of learning new computer applications.

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

In conducting the literature review it was discovered the terms such as technology, multimedia applications, information technology, and instructional technology can refer to computer-based hardware or software and such terms are used interchangeably. It will be taken that all such terms are referring to computer applications for the purpose of this study; however this will pointed out, when it is deemed necessarily for clarity’s sake.

Colleges and universities have invested heavily in the information technology in the effort to improve and enrich educational experience for learners but the investments have not paid and there is a need to treat technology fluency as a liberal art as follows:

“As a liberal art, technology must be taught at the level of critical thinking and reasoning” (Trinkle, 2005, p1).

9

“As a liberal art, technology fluency needs to be broadly integrated into the college curriculum and experience” (Trinkle, 2005, p1).

“As a liberal art, technology should be treated beyond the academic program. Liberal arts schools have long had mission to shape the whole person- mind, body, and spirit” (Trinkle, 2005, p1).

All this leads to the realization that there should be a good support system in place for both faculty and learners in learning to use information technology tools such as various computer applications such as word processors, presentations spreadsheets (Trinkle, 2005). Definition of technology fluency is almost exactly identical to Shapiro and Humes definition of information literacy which is:

“a new liberal art that extends from knowing how to use computers and access information to critical reflection on the nature of the information itself, its technical infrastructure, and its social, cultural, and even philosophical context and impact” (as cited in Mednick, 2002, p4).

Shapiro and Humes are cited from the paper “Information Literacy: The New Challenge” ( Mednick,2002).; where it also stated that information literacy can be hard to achieve for college students since due to the ever changing nature of technology and the advances that are constantly occurring, which leads to “information overload” for students, so it is incumbent on educators librarians and

10

instructors to help facilitate the spread of information literacy/competency and make sure it is being practiced in the classroom. This paper also states that:

“The way to assure that college level students are information literate is to integrate information literacy into the academic curricula--across all disciplines. Because of this information literacy takes a commitment from all levels of academia, from the top down-- from administration to faculty to students” ( Mednick, 2002, p6)

Similar findings are found in “Using Computer Technology in Teaching” paper where a holistic approach to teaching computer skills is advocated (Parsons & Beauchamps, 2000 ). Using an holistic approach to teach information technology tools, such as computer applications, reduces the lack of familiarity and hence reduces the fear of the unknown, this ties in well with the need for user friendly and consistent interface design for computer applications to help learners use the technology at hand as indicated by research (Vonderwell & Zachariah, 2005).

Research indicates that even a basic introductory course in computer science reduces student anxiety and such courses have a strong effect on negative feelings, in a positive way, in that they reduce the fear of failure (Kolehmainen, 1992). These results have also been reproduced by surveying over 500 college students with respect to attitudes towards computer use, taking

11

into consideration their prior knowledge and experience with computers (Hunt & Bohlin, 1991). This is closely related to student perceptions and attitudes towards technology and how they have a very important affect on learning outcomes; researchers recommend that instructors spend time and energy developing the learning climate as stated in study by Daley (as cited in Imel, 2001). The term technology here is used to refer to both hardware and software (Imel, 2001). It is important to schedule class time for using the computer applications that are to be learned (Castleman, 1995). Two variables of computer experience and hours per week per week spent with a computer are found to be significantly related to reduced computer anxiety, enhanced confidence, greater computer knowledge, and increased liking of computers (Necessary & Parrish, 1996).

Interestingly enough in a study titled “Computer learning behavior: Strategies for learning and behavior improvement” by Vincent, Meche and Ross (2002, p331-332) it is cited:

Upon measuring computer attitudes of college students enrolled in a required computer information systems course, Marcoulides (p151-159) concluded that computer anxiety is still present regardless of prior computer experience. Additionally, two studies showed that even experienced computer users report symptoms of computer anxiety when they are confronted with learning new

12

computer applications (Ostrowski, Gardner, and Motawi, p26-42; Elder, Gardner, and Ruth, p17-21).

According to study by Desai (2001) in the discussion and implication section it is stated that it seems that having a moderate level of computer anxiety is better than having low or high level of computer anxiety when it comes to test results. It seems computer anxiety/fear cannot be fully eliminated but moderated and having some of it is better than having very little of it. McInerney and Others(1994) found there may be up to 10 factors underlying anxiety towards computers for beginners.

Referring to Vincent, Meche, and Ross (2002), once again it seems there is a number investigations looking at associations between previous computer usage, age, obsession, and computer attitudes, but the results have been rather mixed. It is also mentioned it is important to have demonstration equipment and classroom layout are extremely important and much care must go into insuring students get the best classroom experience. Finally, it is mentioned that Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (2002) provides excellent guidelines for lesson planning.

Blooms taxonomy can be used to help design good online instruction when using various online computer applications for course management as

13

indicated in a study that uses taxonomy of educational objectives to help develop a graduate-level online instruction (as cited in Chyung & Stepich 2003). This is important in that it demonstrates that we are not necessarily dealing with a brand new paradigm when trying to help learners learn using information technology tools; especially, when utilizing computer applications. When it comes to adult learners in the classroom and learning new knowledge in general there has to be integration with previous knowledge; there is a need for adult learners to actively participate in the learning experience and integration of new knowledge ( Zemke & Zemke 1984).

The extent to which computer-based tools encourage spontaneous student collaboration was one of the earliest surprises about computers. A clear advantage of email for today’s busy commuting students is that it opens up communication among classmates even when they are not physically together. (Chickering & Ehrmann 1996)

The above quote simply states one of the main advantages of using computer-based tools in the classroom which is readily accepted in academia, that collaborative nature of computer-based tools is inherent in their design. Course design that incorporates collaborative learning and instructional technology can help learners to overcome their fears of the difficult content material and the underlying computer technology including new computer applications (Evans, 2000).

14

Students are open to new ways of learning via new media such as using computer applications, but are constrained by amount of time they have to devote to the learning process and settle for ‘satisficing’ approach to learning (Thorpe, 2000, p10). Some examples concrete examples of this attitude from Thrope’s paper listed below:

We have not time to do more than skim and sketch in the meanings of what we are learning ad cannot give time to explore resources, check out conferences or bulletin boards for new understandings (p10).

We have also found that workplace learners do not necessarily want to use their computer for learning even where home access and personal skills are not an issue (p10).

There are great benefits in helping learners over come difficulties in learning computer applications; Eskicioglu and Kopec (2003) found the statistics listed down below that indicate the benefits of multimedia technologies ( including computer applications) in the classroom:

Multimedia applications can enhance student learning. Active learning indicates what percentage we remember: 10% of what we

15

read, 20% of what we hear, 30% of what we see, 50% of what we hear and see, 70% of what we say, and 90%of what we both say and do (Todd as cited in Eskicioglu & Kopec, 2003, p5).

According to the United States Department of Defense data, we have short-term retention of approximately 20% of what we hear, 40% of what we see and hear, and 75% of what we see, hea, and do. Trainees complete courses with multimedia in one-third the time of those receiving traditional instruction, and reach competency levels up to 50% higher. In most cases, the overall co9st of instruction is lower (Oblinger as cited in Eskicioglu & Kopec, 2003, p6).

In broad terms, computer-based instruction works. It offers a 10% to 20% improvement in performance over conventional training methods and a one-third reduction in time on task. They [trainers] can reduce the amount of time that a trainee spends learning by one-third (Fletcher as cited in Eskicioglu & Kopec, 2003, p6).

Eskicioglu & Kopec (2003) also found the focus should not be technology but the use of technology in educating students.

16

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

Population/Sample

The population for this research study was from adult learners enrolled in Central Michigan University Masters of Arts in Education with concentration in Adult Education at off-site location Humber in their Cohort 19 and 20 sections.

Both qualitative and quantitative methods were used in research study. Approximately 40 survey questionnaires (see Appendix A) were distributed to learners. However, only 19(47%) of the questionnaires were completed and returned within the deadline given. It took adult learners about 20 minutes to complete the survey questionnaire.

Data Collection Method(s)

Literature review was done on the thesis topic. Questionnaire with cover letter (see Appendix B) requesting participation was sent out to participants using email.

17

The survey questionnaire was administered via email to the students of Central Michigan University’s Masters of Arts in Education cohorts 19 and 20 at Humber College. After the survey questionnaire was completed by adult learners emailed back the survey. The survey questionnaire consisted of twenty questions divided into four sections. First section of the survey questionnaire consists of five questions asking about the learners’ self-perception of their computer skills and proficiency. The second section of the survey questionnaire consisted of five questions asking about student access to the computer technology. The third section of the survey questionnaire consists of five questions on fear of information technology and computer applications. Finally, the fourth section consist of five questions concerning whether adult learners have adequate support when it comes to information technology or computer applications or know where to get support.

18

Data Analysis Method(s) The twenty survey questions were grouped into four groups each consisting of five questions each in the following categories: skills, access, fear and support.

Skills category survey questions used 5-point Likert scale (Excellent = 5, Above Average = 4, Average = 3, Below Average = 2, Extremely Poor = 1).

Access category survey questions used Yes/No type questions ; with “Yes” responses being given value of four and “No” responses given value of so comparison with other survey questions which were done with Likert scale can be made.

Fear category survey questions used 5-point Likert scale (Strongly Agree = 5, Agree = 4, Undecided = 3, Disagree = 2, Strongly Disagree = 1)

Support category survey questions used Yes/No type questions; with “Yes” responses being given value of four and “No” responses given value of two so comparison with other survey questions which were done with Likert scale can be made.

19

Fear category survey questions were correlated with the three other categories of skills, access and support to see how strong a correlation exists between fear and the other three categories.

There were instances when some of the questions were not answered so an average of the answers given by the participant in that particular survey category of questions was given. These averaged answers are noted by * symbol in the data collection tables.

The data obtained from this research was analyzed using Spearman rankorder correlation coefficient provided by the website: http://faculty.vassar.edu/lowry/VassarStats.html using Ordinal Data link and then selecting Rank Order Correlation weblink to enter data. The data was double checked for accuracy using http://www.wessa.net/rankcorr.wasp it provided both corrected and non-corrected Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient. The correction refers to how the calculations are handled when taking into consideration that several rank values might be the same. It was discovered the first website used corrected Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient.

Hypothesis 1 The null and alternative hypotheses as stated below were tested as follows:

20

Null Hypothesis: Having access to computer technology will not reduce fear of learning new computer applications. Alternative Hypothesis: Having access to computer technology will reduce the fear of learning new computer applications.

Hypothesis 2 The null and alternative hypotheses as stated below were tested as follows: Null Hypothesis: Having good computer skills will not reduce fear of learning new computer applications. Alternative Hypothesis: Having good computer skills will reduce the fear of learning new computer applications.

Hypothesis 3 The null and alternative hypotheses as stated below were tested as follows: Null Hypothesis: Having adequate support with computer technology will not reduce fear of learning new computer applications. Alternative Hypothesis: Having adequate support with computer technology will reduce the fear of learning new computer applications.

21

CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS

The purpose of this study is was determine how the factors of personal access time to computer technology and computer skills can lead to the fear of learning new computer applications from students in Central Michigan University's Master of Arts in Education cohorts 19 and 20 at Humber College. The number of surveys sent out was 40 and the number of surveys returned was 19. Some of the surveys submitted had some questions that were not answered, so average value of responses given by participant for related questions was given and these data points are noted with “*” symbol (see Table 1 and Table 2). Four survey participants didn’t answer any of the support questions so that is why correlation calculations involving support have only fifteen participants and their responses (see Table 5).

22

Table 1: DATA OBTAINED FROM RESEARCH SURVEY QUESTIONNARES

Participant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Rating of Scores based on 5point Likert Scale for Skills 5 4 3 3 2 4 4 4 5 3 3 4 5 4 4 5 2 3 4 3

5 2 3 3 2 4 3 4 5 3 2 3 5 4 4 5 2 3 4 3

5 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 5 3 3 3 5 4 5 5 3 4 4 3

5 5 4 3 3 3 3 4 5 4 3 4 5 4 5 5 2 4 4 1

5 5 4 3 2 4 3 4 5 *3 3 *4 5 4 *5 5 *2 3 3 1

Total Ranked Score /25 20 17 15 12 18 16 20 25 16 14 18 25 20 23 25 11 17 19 11

Rating of Scores based on 5point Likert Scale for Fear 5 1 4 4 4 4 3 2 4 3 2 3 1 3 1 1 4 3 5 4

5 1 3 4 5 3 5 2 3 2 3 2 1 3 1 1 4 3 1 4

5 1 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 3 3 4 1 3 5 5 2 4

5 1 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 3 5 3 1 2 1 2 5 5 1 3

Total Ranked Score /25 5 20 19 23 18 20 13 17 14 18 14 7 14 5 10 23 19 10 18

5 1 5 3 5 4 4 2 3 2 4 3 1 2 1 *3 5 3 1 3

Survey questions dealing with access and support were given in “Yes/No” format and then translated into 5-point Likert Scale with “Yes” responses given value of four and “No” responses value of two (see Table 2)

23

Table 2: DATA OBTAINED FROM RESEARCH SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRES Access Survey Questions Participant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Yes =4 Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

No =2 Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes

Yes No No No No No No No No No No Yes No Yes No No No No Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Total Ranked Score

Support Survey Questions

/25

Yes = 4 No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

20 18 14 18 16 18 18 18 18 14 18 20 18 20 16 18 16 18 20

Yes

Total Ranked Score No =2 Yes Yes No No Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No Yes

Yes No

/25 No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No No No No Yes No

Yes No No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No

No No *3 No No No Yes *3 No *3 Yes Yes No *3

14 16 13 14 18 16 16 17 14 15 16 18 16 13

No

Yes Yes

Yes

18

24

Table3: SPEARMAN’S RANK CORRELATION COEFFICIENT: TESTING FOR CORRELATION BETWEEEN FEAR AND ACCESS X = Fear Results Ranks for X

Pairs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Y = Access Results Y

1.5 16.5 14.5 18.5 12 16.5 6 10 8 12 8 3 8 1.5 4.5 18.5 14.5 4.5 12 P one tailed = 0.036577

17.5 10.5 1.5 10.5 4 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 1.5 10.5 17.5 10.5 17.5 4 10.5 4 10.5 17.5 P two tailed = 0.073153

n = 19

Rs = -0.4211

Raw Data for X Y 5 20 19 23 18 20 13 17 14 18 14 7 14 5 10 23 19 10 18 t=1.91

20 18 14 18 16 18 18 18 18 14 18 20 18 20 16 18 16 18 20

Df = 17

Table 3: Data analysis provided: http://faculty.vassar.edu/lowry/VassarStats.html using Ordinal Data link and then selecting Rank Order Correlation weblink to enter data. Accuracy of data analysis was double checked using: Wessa, P. (2007), Free Statistics Software, Office for Research Development and Education, version 1.1.22-r2, URL http://www.wessa.net/ All rights reserved. Academic license for non-commercial use only.

Data was entered in at: http://www.wessa.net/rankcorr.wasp to get the following results: 25

Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (Rho) = -0.421092

95% CI for rho (Fisher's Z transformed) = -0.734767 to 0.04095

Upper side P = 0.963 (H1: positive correlation) Lower side P = 0.037 (H1: negative correlation) Two sided P = 0.074 (H1: any correlation)

Since spearman rank correlation coefficient is near value of negative one there is a moderately negative correlation between two factors that were measured. Null Hypothesis is rejected and Alternative Hypothesis is accepted.

26

Table 4: SPEARMAN’S RANK CORRELATION COEFFICIENT: TESTING FOR CORRELATION BETWEEEN FEAR AND SKILLS X = Fear Results Pairs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Y = Skills Results Ranks for X Y 1.5 14 16.5 8.5 14.5 5 18.5 3 12 10.5 16.5 6.5 6 14 10 18 8 6.5 12 4 8 10.5 3 18 8 14 1.5 16 4.5 18 18.5 1.5 14.5 8.5 4.5 12 12 1.5 P one tailed = 0.000053 P two tailed = 0.000105 n = 19 Rs = -0.7725

Raw Data for X Y 5 20 19 23 18 20 13 17 14 18 14 7 14 5 10 23 19 10 18 t = -5.02

20 17 15 12 18 16 20 25 16 14 18 25 20 23 25 11 17 19 11

Df = 17

Table 4: Data analysis provided: http://faculty.vassar.edu/lowry/VassarStats.html using Ordinal Data link and then selecting Rank Order Correlation weblink to enter data.

Accuracy of data analysis was double checked using: Wessa, P. (2007), Free Statistics Software, Office for Research Development and Education, version 1.1.22-r2, URL http://www.wessa.net/ All rights reserved. Academic license for non-commercial use only.

Data was entered in at: http://www.wessa.net/rankcorr.wasp to get the following results:

27

Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (Rho) = -0.772506 95% CI for rho (Fisher's Z transformed) = -0.908086 to -0.49035 Upper side P > 0.9999 (H1: positive correlation) Lower side P < 0.0001 (H1: negative correlation) Two sided P = 0.0002 (H1: any correlation) Since spearman rank correlation coefficient is near value of negative one there is a strong negative correlation between two factors that were measured. Null Hypothesis is rejected and Alternative Hypothesis is accepted.

28

Table 5: SPEARMAN’S RANK CORRELATION COEFFICIENT: TESTING FOR CORRELATION BETWEEEN FEAR AND SUPPORT X = Fear Results

Y = Support Results Ranks for

Pairs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

X

Y

1.5 13.5 12 15 10.5 13.5 5 9 7 10.5 7 3 7 1.5 4 P one tailed = 0.418462 n = 15

4 9 1.5 4 14 9 9 12 4 6 9 14 9 1.5 14 P two tailed = 0.836923 Rs = -0.0581

Raw Data for X Y 5 20 19 23 18 20 13 17 14 18 14 7 14 5 10 t = -0.21

14 16 13 14 18 16 16 17 14 15 16 18 16 13 18

Df = 13

Table 5: Data analysis provided: http://faculty.vassar.edu/lowry/VassarStats.html using Ordinal Data link and then selecting Rank Order Correlation weblink to enter data.

Accuracy of data analysis was double checked using: Wessa, P. (2007), Free Statistics Software, Office for Research Development and Education, version 1.1.22-r2, URL http://www.wessa.net/ All rights reserved. Academic license for non-commercial use only.

Data was entered in at: http://www.wessa.net/rankcorr.wasp to get the following results:

29

Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (Rho) = -0.05813

95% CI for rho (Fisher's Z transformed) = -0.553899 to 0.468071

Upper side P = 0.5838 (H1: positive correlation) Lower side P = 0.4162 (H1: negative correlation) Two sided P = 0.8324 (H1: any correlation)

Since spearman rank correlation coefficient is near value of zero, slightly negative, there is little or no correlation between two factors that were measured. Null Hypothesis is rejected and Alternative Hypothesis is accepted.

30

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary The purpose of this study is to determine how the factors of personal access time to computer technology and computer skills can lead to the fear of learning new computer applications from students in Central Michigan University's Master of Arts in Education cohorts 19 and 20 at Humber College.

Participants were surveyed via email regarding factors of personal access time to computer technology, their computer skills, access to computer support and the level of fear they have when it comes to learning new computer applications. Likert scale methodology was primarily used in the survey questionnaires. Statistical analysis was done employing Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient methodology to see how strong a correlation there was between the fear of learning new computer applications and the factors of personal access time to computer technology, computer skill levels and access to computer support respectively.

Course design that incorporates collaborative learning and instructional technology can help learners to overcome their fears of the difficult content material and the underlying computer technology including new computer applications (Ruby, 2000).

31

Using an holistic approach to teach information technology tools, such as computer applications, reduces the lack of familiarity and hence reduces the fear of the unknown, this ties in well with the need for user friendly and consistent interface design for computer applications to help learners use the technology at hand as indicated by research (Vonderwell & Zachariah 2005).

Blooms taxonomy can be used to help design good online instruction when using various online computer applications for course management as indicated in a study that uses taxonomy of educational objectives to help develop a graduate-level online instruction (as sighted in Chyung & Stepich 2003). This is important in that it demonstrates that we are not necessarily dealing with a brand new paradigm when trying to help learners learn using information technology tools; especially, when utilizing computer applications. When it comes to adult learners in the classroom and learning new knowledge in general there has to be integration with previous knowledge; there is a need for adult learners to actively participate in the learning experience and integration of new knowledge (Zemke & Zemke 1984).

Here are great benefits in helping learners over come difficulties in learning computer applications; Eskicioglu and Kopec (2003) found the statistics listed down below that indicate the benefits of multimedia technologies ( including computer applications) in the classroom:

32

Multimedia applications can enhance student learning. Active learning indicates what percentage we remember: 10% of what we read, 20% of what we hear, 30% of what we see, 50% of what we hear and see, 70% of what we say, and 90%of what we both say and do (Todd as cited in Eskicioglu & Kopecc, 2003, p5).

According to the United States Department of Defense data, we have short-term retention of approximately 20% of what we hear, 40% of what we see and hear, and 75% of what we see, hea, and do. Trainees complete courses with multimedia in one-third the time of those receiving traditional instruction, and reach competency levels up to 50% higher. In most cases, the overall co9st of instruction is lower (Oblinger as cited in Eskicioglu & Kopec, 2003, p6).

In broad terms, computer-based instruction works. It offers a 10% to 20% improvement in performance over conventional training methods and a one-third reduction in time on task. They [trainers] can reduce the amount of time that a trainee spends learning by one-third (Fletcher as cited in Eskicioglu & Kopec 2003, p 6).

33

Eskicioglu and Kopec (2003) also found the focus should not be technology but the use of technology in educating students.

Conclusions

It was discovered that there is a strong negative correlation between computer skills and the fear of learning new computer applicants. There was a moderate negative correlation between access time and the fear of learning new computer applications and finally there was a small negative correlation between factor of having adequate support and the fear of learning new computer applications. Keeping in mind quite a few applicants didn’t fill out completely the survey questions relating to support survey questions, so results of only fifteen participants that filled out both the fear and support category survey questions were used as opposed to results of 19 participants in the other two categories. It seems that incorporating development of computer skills and access to computer technology in the course curriculum will help lessen the fear of learning computer applications.

34

Recommendations

Students; especially, adult learners should be encouraged to continually develop their computer skills and familiarize themselves with the latest computer technology as part of their life long learning plan and hopefully this will lessen their fear of learning news computer applications. Further research is needed on determining on how factors of computer skills, computer technology access and computer support are correlated.

35

REFERENCES

Bloom, B. (2002), "Bloom's Taxonomy." Online: http://www.bena.com/ewinters/Bloom.html Retrieved October 14, 2007

Castleman, J. B. (1995). Decreasing Computer Anxiety and Increasing Computer Usage among Early Childhood Education Majors through a Hands-On Approach in a Non threatening Environment. Ed. D. Practicum, Nova Southeastern University. Online: http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/000001 9b/80/14/43/73.pdf Retrieved October 14, 2007

Chickering, A. & Stephen C. E. (1996), "Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as Lever," AAHE Bulletin, October, pp. 3-6. Online: http://www.tltgroup.org/programs/seven.html Retrieved October 14, 2007

36

Chyung, S. & Stepich, D. (2003). Applying The “Congruence” Principle of Bloom’s Taxonomy To Designing Online Instruction, The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), pp. 317-330

Desai, Mayur S.(2001). Computer Anxiety and Performance:An Application of a Change Model in a Pedagogical Setting. Journal of Instructional Psychology, September 2001. Online: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCG/is_3_28/ai_79370567 Retrieved October 14, 2007

Eskicioglu, A. & Kopec, D. (2003). The Ideal Multimedia-Enabled Classroom: Perspectives from Psychology, Education and Information Science. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia. 12 (2), pp. 199-221. Norfolk, VA: AACE. Online: http://www.sci.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~eskicioglu/papers/AACE2003.pdf Retrieved October 14 2007

Hunt, Nancy P. & Bohlin, Roy M. (1991). Entry Attitudes of Students towards Using Computers. Online: http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/000001 9b/80/24/0c/77.pdf Retrieved October 14 2007 37

Imel 200, S. (2002). Adult Learning in Chort Groups. Practice Application Brief No. 24. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/000001 9b/80/29/d3/3a.pdf Retrieved October 14 2007

Kolehmainen, Paivi(1992). The Changes in Computer Anxiety in a Required Computer Course. Online: http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/000001 9b/80/12/f1/44.pdf Retrieved October 14 2007

Mednick, (2002). Information Literacy: The New Challenge, Information Analyses. Online: http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/000001 9b/80/1a/08/98.pdf Retrieved October 14 2007

McInerney & Others(1994). Definitely Not Just Another Computer Anxiety Instrument: The Development and Validation of CALM: Computer Anxiety and Learning Measure. Research; Speeches/Meeting Papers. Online: http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/000001 9b/80/14/21/74.pdf Retrieved October 14 2007

38

Necessary, J.R. & Parish, T.H. (1996). "The Relationship between Computer Usage and Computer-Related Attitudes and Behaviors, Education, Spring 1996, 116(3).

Parsons and Beauchamps (2000). Using Computer Technology in Teaching. Online: http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/000001 9b/80/16/94/8a.pdf Retrieved October 14 2007

Evans, Ruby (2000). Beyond Chalk and Talk: Engaging Students in the Learning Process. Online: http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/000001 9b/80/1b/c5/96.pdf Retrieved October 14 2007

Thorpe, Mary (2000). New Technology and Lifelong Learning, Information Analyses. Online: http://www.open.ac.uk/lifelong-learning/papers/393CCEC30008-67C6-0000015700000157_MaryThorpepaper.docv5.0.doc Retrieved October 14 2007

39

Trinkle (2005). The 361° Model for Transforming Teaching and Learning with Technology, Educause Quarterly, 28(4). Online: http://connect.educause.edu/library/abstract/The361ModelforTransf/39945?time= 1192413007 Retrieved October 14 2007

Vonderwell and Zachariah (2005). Factors that Influence Participation In Online Learning, Journal of Research on Technology Education, 38(2). Online: http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/ 2a/5b/43.pdf Retrieved October 14 2007

Vincent, A. & Meche, M., and Ross D. R. (2002). Computer Learning Behavior: Strategies For Learning And Behavior Improvement. Journal of Information Systems Education, 13(4). Online: http://www.jise.appstate.edu/Issues/13/331.pdf Retrieved October 14, 2007

Zemke and Zemke (1984). 30 Things We Know For Sure About Adult Learning. Innovation Abstracts, 6(8) Online: http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/FacDevCom/guidebk/teachtip/adul ts-3.htm Retrieved October 14, 2007

40

APPENDICES

41

Appendix B: Letter of Permission to distribute Survey

February 28, 2007

Mr. Najamuddin Mohammed 24 Mabelle Avenue, Suite 402 Toronto, Ontario, Canada M9A4X7

Dear Mr. Mohammed, I have reviewed the materials sent by Dr. DuFord regarding your study of the perceptions of CMU graduate students concerning personal access time to computer technology and how computer skills affect learning new computer applications. Your research protocol appears to be in keeping with that policy, thus, I gladly extend permission for you to distribute surveys to the subject pool described.

Good luck in this undertaking. Very truly yours, Jamie B. Slater, Ed.D. Director of Organizational Research and Assessment Off-Campus Programs Central Michigan University

42

Appendix C: Consent Form for Research Questionnaire

Central Michigan University February 12, 2007 From: Najamuddin Mohammed

Dear: Participant I am interested in determining how the factors of and personal access time to computer technology and computer skills can lead to the fear of learning new computer applications from students in Central Michigan University's Master of Arts in Education cohorts 19 and 20 at Humber College. My intent is to use the results to formulate a strategy to minimize the fear of learning computer applications among adult learners. You have been selected to participate in this study because we had participated in a Central Michigan University class in Master of Arts in Education program together. This study is in partial fulfillment of Master of Arts in Education program with concentration in Adult Education. The enclosed questionnaire is designed to obtain information about your computer skills and personal access time to computer technology while taking place Central Michigan University courses. This study has been approved by university's review board. Your responses will be anonymous and seriously considered in developing the planned strategy. At your request summary of results of the survey can be provided to you as well as a copy of the complete study. I would appreciate your completion of the questionnaire by March 21. Taking into consideration that your schedule is busy and your time is valuable. However, we hope that the 20 minutes it will take you to complete the questionnaire it will help lead to better understanding how to overcome fear of learning new computer applications. Thank you in advance for your participation. If you have questions about the study, you can contact me at 416-891-3967 or email me at [email protected] with your concerns. You may also contact my faculty advisor for this study Dr. Susan DuFord: [email protected]

Yours truly, Najamuddin Mohammed

43

Appendix D: Survey

Survey Questions

Skills: For next set of questions use the following scale to record your answers: Excellent = 5, Above Average = 4, Average = 3, Below Average = 2, Extremely Poor = 1 1. How would rate your computer skills? 1

2

3

4

5

Answer:

2. How would you describe your personal experience with computer applications? 1

2

3

4

5

Answer:

3. How easily are you able to learn new computer applications? 1

2

3

4

5

Answer:

4. How would you describe your personal experience using the Internet? 1

2

3

4

5

Answer:

5. How you rate your Internet skills?

44

Access: 6. Do you have computer access at home? a)Yes b) No Answer:

7. Do you have enough personal access time to use your computer effectively? a)Yes b) No Answer:

8. Do you have high speed internet access at home? a)Yes b) No Answer:

9. Do you spend 20 hours or more online at home? a)Yes b) No Answer:

10. Do you use your internet access to look up services and find answers to questions you have? a)Yes b) No Answer:

45

Fear: For next set of questions use the following scale to record your answers: Strongly Agree = 5, Agree = 4, Undecided = 3, Disagree = 2, Strongly Disagree = 1 11. Do you have some concerns/fears when it comes to learning new computer applications? 1

2

3

4

5

Answer:

12. Are you afraid you will be left behind your fellow classmates when it comes to learning new computer applications? 1

2

3

4

5

Answer:

13. If you had more time with computer technology and applications would it be less intimidating for you to learn new computer applications. 1

2

3

4

5

Answer:

14. Do you find it difficult to navigate through all the features and options in computer applications? 1

2

3

4

5

Answer:

15. Are you fearful when it comes to learning a computer application on your own? 1

2

3

4

5

Answer:

46

Support: 16. Is there someone you can turn to when it comes to problems you are using or learning new computer applications? a)Yes b) No Answer:

17. If you were able to access to new computer applications from home would this help you in learning to using them? a)Yes b) No Answer:

18. Would you require a computer lab setting with an instructor to learn a new computer application? a)Yes b) No Answer:

19. Do you use the help features in computer applications when trying to learn them? a)Yes b) No Answer:

20. Are computer applications intuitive enough? a)Yes b) No Answer:

47