An Examination of the Physical Proximity of Learning in Shaping Students’ Mastery of Technology-Enhanced Mathematics and Science Concepts

3.3. Location of the Study

The study was conducted in two districts, Kayonza (Eastern province) and Gasabo (Kigali), Rwanda. The participants were University of Rwanda postgraduate students studying at the College of Education, Rukara, and Remera Campus. The research area offered the ideal environment that is both technologically empowered with the appropriate participants who took part in the study.

3.4. Target Population

The respondents for this research were masters’ students in the college of education (ACEITLMS) and Remera campus. Both females and males had equal chances of participation. The master students undertaking a master degree in chemistry, mathematics, physics, and biology education were the participants in this study because of their exposure in interacting with chemistry, mathematics, physics, and biology and various forms of technology-enhanced learning. Moreover, they seemed more objective and less biased in their opinions and suggestions therefore provided concrete and rich data. The language barrier was also limited while using the university students.

3.5. Sampling Procedure and Sample Size

Sampling is a process of choosing a part of a whole on the basis of which a judgment about the aggregate is made (Kothari, 2004). The choice of the study area at the college of education was done purposively due to the availability of technology resources and participants. The participants were as well chosen by purposive sampling since the study involved a whole class of science students (Kothari, 2004).

A sample size of 88 students (master students) from both Remera and Rukara campus was purposively selected. Participants have an age range of 21-40. These students have mixed ability levels. The students have different cultural backgrounds, different economic and social statuses. The sample for the study was arrived at by using non-probability convenience sampling. Convenience sampling is the sampling technique in which the sample is chosen based on availability, time, location, or ease of access with the participants (Razaveih et al., 2015).

3.6. Data Collection Tools

These are devices that are used to gather data from test subjects (Salmons, 2011). A multiple case research methodology was used since it provides more extensive descriptions and explanations of the subject under study. This was ideal to investigate a small number of cases but giving out a voluminous amount of information. Interviews were used to collect data on the student personal reports. 6 In-depth semi-structured interviews were extended to students in the university in addition to classroom observation which was used. The research also used questionnaires. The respondents were assessed before, during and after a set period of time in order to see the difference that comes along the way.

The questionnaire

According to Creswell (2014), a questionnaire is an instrument in which respondents write answers to questions asked or mark items that indicate their answers. In this study, close-ended questionnaire was issued to collect data from the students since all the respondents were able to read and write(Creswell, 2014). The questionnaire was administered to eighty-eight (88) respondents. This was done towards the end of semester for postgraduate students in cohort 2 and 3 of Rukara campus and cohort 3 of Remera campus. The design of the questionnaire items follows Garrison's (2017) and Gunawardena and Zittle's (1997) tools for assessing online collaborative learning in the CoI. These authors had used the tool in their research projects where they proved to working very well. For example, Gunawardena and Zittle (1997) used a similar instrument in their research entitled, "Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment" online learning.

The questionnaire had three sections with all questions that were closed-ended. Section A of the questionnaire had respondent’s bio-data questions items which were seven in total. Section B had 12 items for the social cognitive presence while section C had 14 items for the cognitive presence. A total of 33 questionnaire items were used. Section B and C had 26 Five-point Likert scale items to measure the relationship between social and cognitive presence in online collaborative learning. The questionnaire assessed participants' online collaborative learning, psychological proximities (social presence and cognitive presence) as identified from the literature to be significant factors that influence online learning. The questionnaire items were validated by piloting the study to a similar population who were not involved in the study.

The pilot study is conducted to achieve the validity in any research (Gani,Rathakrishnan & Krishnasamy, 2020). It is a pre-test version of a research instrument before carrying out the actual study (Gani et al., 2020). Its reliability was checked by computing the Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient using SPSS, version 25.0. A reliability test was done to check if all the questionnaire items measured the same latent variables. The recommended values of Cronbach alpha range between 0 and 1, where the value of 1 is excellent, $>0.5$ is poor, and $<0.5$ is unacceptable. For the pilot study, a Cronbach alpha value of 0.8 was obtained which showed that the questionnaire tool was working very well. Furthermore, the validity of the questionnaire items was vet by a team of experts that included university of Rwanda professor in digital education and other masters’ students where the questions were modified before using the tool to collect data in the research study.

Interviews

In this study, the respondents answered semi-structured questions about why, how, and what they experienced while doing their studies online. The interview guide had two sections A and B. Section A had seven questions on respondent bio-data while section B had 14 questions about students’ experiences of online learning and how the online small group discussions assisted them during their studies. These questions were free response and other follow up questions were asked in order collect in depth and detailed information about online collaborative learning and how social and cognitive presence supports it. Just a glimpse of the questions, respondents replied on themes like language, on small group discussions, ICT skills, opportunities, strengths, and challenges that they faced during their online collaborative studies. This approach allowed the collection of first-hand (primary data) and in-depth information from the participants (Gani et al., 2020). The data collected was used to supplement the one obtained using the social and cognitive presence questionnaire.

Most of the interview sessions were conducted in face-to-face approach while other sessions were conducted via phone call for students that were not in reachable areas (international students) as most of the data was collected while we were still in the lock down due to Covid-19 pandemic. The data was recorded in order to gather accurate information for transcription using otter software and analysis. Additional notes were written for each session in order to supplement the recordings. The written notes saved to add more information on the recordings so that after transcription, the patterns in the data are clearly seen.

Probing questions were asked to get more information from the participants. Like the questionnaire items, the online interview guide items were piloted to examine if the tool had any flaws that need to be adjusted at an early stage (Gani et al., 2020). During piloting it was noted that the interview guide questions had minor problems that includes complex sentences but also use of difficult vocabularies. The questions were revisited and edited after which they were tested again. The flaws were addressed by a team of experts from the University of Rwanda, college of education, and other masters’ students studying at University of Rwanda, College of Education before implementing the tool for data collection program.

Social Demographic Description of respondents

Age	Female	Male	Total
	N (%)	N (%)	N (%)
21-30	14(15.9)	21(23.9)	35(39.8)
31-40	10(11.4)	40(45.5)	50(56.9)
41-50	0(0.00)	3(3.3)	3(3.3)
Total	24(27.3)	64(72.7)	88 (100)
Cohort
2	19(21.6)	48(54.5)	67(76.1)
3	5(5.7)	16(18.2)	21(23.9)
Total	24(27.3)	64(72.7)	88(100)
Major subject
Biology	9(10.2)	12(13.6)	21(23.8)
Chemistry	10(11.4)	15(17.0)	25(28.4)
Mathematics	4(4.5)	20(22.7)	24(27.2)
Physics	1(1.1)	17(19.3)	18(20.4)
Total	24(27.3)	64(72.7)	88(100)
Campus
Remera-ACEITLMS	5(5.7)	23(26.1)	28(31.8)
Rukara-ACEITLMS	19(21.6)	41(46.6)	60(69.2)
Total	24(27.3)	64(72.7)	88(100)

There were 88 students who took part in the study and 24 were females representing 27.3% while 64 were males with a percentage of 72.7%. In this study, 69.2% of the respondents were studying in Rukara campus while 31.8% were studying in Remera campus. There were 5 female respondents from Remera campus representing 5.7% with 23 males representing 26.1%. Rukara campus also had 19 females representing 21.6% with 41 males with a percentage of 46.6. Remera had a representation of 31.8% while Rukara had a representation of 69.2%. From the summary, 67 respondents were from cohort 2 while 21 were from cohort 3. From the data, it was realized that 76.1 % of the respondents were in cohort 2 and 23.9 % were in cohort 3 totaling to 88 students. The study involved a total of 88 postgraduate students out of which 60 were doing their studies at University of Rwanda, College of Education, Rukara campus, and 28 were studying at Remera campus, weekend program.

The respondents from both cohorts had students pursuing chemistry, biology, physics and mathematics. Chemistry had 25 respondents representing 28.4%, biology had 21 participants representing 23.8% and physics had 18 students representing 20.4% with mathematics having 24 a representation of 27.2% totaling to 88 students representing 100%.

In this study, the respondents had ages that ranged from 21 to 50. The age bracket of 21-30 were 35 representing 39.8% while the age 31 to 40 were 50 having 56.9% and this is the bracket that comprised more than half of the respondents. The age bracket from 41 to 50 were only 3 with a percentage of 3.3%.The average age of the respondents was noted to be within the range of 31 to 40. This shows that the respondents were satisfactorily mature to provide relevant information regarding the questions asked.

3.7. Data Analysis Methods

Data analysis was principally inspired by discourse and content analysis and grounded theory. The qualitative data from semi-structured interviews and observations, the researcher used the thematic analysis method since the research evaluated main ideas from interviewer and observations scripts grouped in themes; for the quantitative data from the document content analysis and Questionnaire, different techniques were applied such as editing, interpreting, relating, coding and tabulation and were analysed descriptively.The researcher then coded salient issues from the transcripts and field notes.

Quantitative data collected was coded and analyzed using R software version 3.5.3

3.8. Validity and Reliability of the Study

Validity means the degree to which a test can be able to measure what it’s supposed to measure. To ensure validity the researcher worked closely with the Science lecturers in the college more so those experienced in the use of ICT in teaching. The researcher also incorporated other advisors from the field of mathematics and science education.

The reliability of the instruments was determined to ensure that results obtained are the same even if it is repeated many times(Otieno, 2017).The researcher found that the reliability index was greater than 0.7 since any reliability index of 0.70 and above is assumed to be a good level that one can rely on this instrument for good results by the end of the study, thus ensuring good analysis and better conclusions will be made (Kothari, 2004).

3.9. Ethical Considerations

To ensure confidentiality, the participants were given fictional names, and their participation including technology-enhanced mathematics and science education audio and video recordings, were fully voluntary and based on informed consent with an option to withdraw at any time of the research process. Personal data was anonymized and stored securely. Before data collection, the researcher sought for ethics clearances from relevant ethics committees in Rwanda.

The researcher first considered and adopted into the study the guidelines and regulations for academic research from the University of Rwanda (UR). This study was conducted after getting a written consent approval from UR through ACEITLMS and authorization from the high authority of the Study areas. Also, the roles, responsibilities and rights of each participant including denying to participate or withdrawing at any stage of the study were communicated to them before conducting the study.