X hits on this document

PDF document

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln - page 45 / 152





45 / 152


access to Web 2.0 technologies. This was also based on the convenience of the sample

for the researcher since this was her place of employment.

Participants were selected using criterion sampling based on their class and

instructor. According to Patton (2002), criterion sampling can be an ―ongoing program

monitoring system‖ and it works with ―quality assurance efforts‖, which is the goal of

this study (p. 238). The participants did not receive any type of compensation for

participation and did not experience any type of punitive recourse if they did not

participate. The reciprocity for the participants was that they had access to the results of

the study and the results were shared with community college faculty with the hope that

the data would have a transformative effect on their pedagogy in using Web 2.0


The quantitative research questions were answered by collecting the results from

the pretest and the posttest (Appendix A). Also data were collected using the classroom

community survey. The survey instrument was a 20-item Likert scale that has been

tested for validity and reliability and diagnosed the level of classroom community. This

survey self reports students‘ perceptions of their classroom, learning and

interconnectedness among classmates and instructor. The quantitative analysis included

a detailed description of the population and a discussion of the sample reviewing the

characteristics of participants and nonparticipants. A repeated-measures 2 x 2 ANOVA

where the factors were group (Web 2.0 and non-Web 2.0), level (Beginning and

Intermediate), and time (pretest and posttest) was used to analyze the pretest and posttest

scores. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate the self reported level of classroom

Document info
Document views506
Page views506
Page last viewedFri Jan 20 08:15:41 UTC 2017