An Evaluation of the Mobile Research Supervision Initiative (MRSI) at Makerere University

1. E/merge2008 Online Conference 7th – 18th July 2008 An Evaluation of the Mobile Research Supervision Initiative (MRSI) at Makerere University

2. Overview • Introduction • Makerere University, Department of Distance Education • Genesis of the MRSI • Main Research Question • Specific Research Questions • Evaluation Methodology • Results • Discussion and Conclusion

3. Introduction • Pervasiveness of Mobile Phones • All sectors now have mobile applications • Education sector and mobile phones • Academic and administrative support Makerere • Example – MRSI

4. Introduction… • Short Message Service support • Field data collection support • Making face to face appointments • Pointers to useful literature • Motivation • Pacing the student • Encouraging collaboration • Deadlines

5. Makerere University, Department of Distance Education • Established in 1991 • Programmes offered by distance education • Has 4 programmes run on collaborative basis • BCom (3500), BEd (2100), BSc (200), CYP (110) • Student support activities • Face to face (campus and centers), print & radio • Online learning – access constraints (only 1%) • Now mobile learning (97% with mobile phones) • MRSI

6. Genesis of the MRSI • Research as a partial requirement • Supervision - a nightmare • 40% throughput (Otto & Wrightson, 2005) • Why MRSI • Make the research process a rewarding and exciting activity • Increase supervisor’s physical and virtual presence • Minimise the perceived negative impact of lack of face-to-face interaction • Personal touch provider • Hence MRSI • Initiative started in 2005/06 academic year • Supervisors were encouraged to use mobile phones • Need for an evaluation

7. Main Research Question • Worthiness of the MRSI

8. Specific Research Questions • What research supervision aspects were most adequately handled through distance learner mobile research supervision at Makerere University? • What influence did mobile research supervision have on students’ completion rate? • What were the constraints faced by the research students during mobile research supervision? • What were the cost implications of mobile research supervision to the student, supervisor and Department? • What other academic and administrative components could be delivered via mobile phones to distance learners at Makerere University?

9. Evaluation Methodology • Mixed quantitative and qualitative approaches • Population – research students, supervisors and DE administrators • Research students – Simple Random Sampling • In-depth interviews – supervisors (5) and DE (2) administrators – Purposive • Questionnaire (ownership, connectivity issues and research supervision) • Interview Guide (connectivity issues and research supervision) • Analysis - Descriptive statistics

10. Results – Supervision Aspects Adequately Served by M-learning • Fix face to face meetings appointments (96%) • Field research guidance from supervisors and fellow students (90%) • Communication with supervisors to create intimacy (56%) • Motivating student in field (54%) • MRSI broke the phobia • MRSI reduced the loneliness in the field • MRSI created a virtual community of practice • Facilitated active and collaborative learning

11. Results – MRSI and Students’ Throughput • Research paper does not determine student’s throughput • No significant difference in completion time • 5 months to complete their research project paper • MRSI did not in any way influence the student’s research project completion time. • Attrition rate of 40% reported in Otto and Wrightson (2005) stems from other intervening factors which are a subject for further research

12. Results - Constraints • Students were not adequately prepared for the MRSI • Supervisors – Experienced information overload on phones. • Supervisor – Increased cognitive load when multitasking

13. Results - Cost implications • Views on MRSI cost experiences were sought • Airtime credit a major constraint in MRSI

14. Results – Other Academic & administrative components • Delivery of content (learning objects) to learners • Augmenting text based materials • Providing links to useful materials • Reminders • Pedagogical support by tutors

15. Recommendations • Need to negotiate with mobile telecommunications service providers to give a concession in communications charges to educational institutions • Provide call centers

16. Conclusion • Mobile phone are handy device for facilitating active and collaborative learning • It is worth investing in MRSI for distance learners • It is worth investing in developing e-learning solutions geared towards personalising learning • M-learning provides learning support to learners at anytime in any place

17. Issues for Further Research • Cost/benefit analysis of mobile learning • Causes of high attrition rates of distance education learners at Makerere University • Mobile learning objects development and delivery

18. The End QUESTIONS AND DICUSSIONS WELCOME About the Authors Paul B. Muyinda (Presenter) Department of Distance Education, Makerere University, UGANDA, e-mail: mpbirevu@iace.mak.ac.ug, +256-772-406919 Jude T. Lubega (PhD) Faculty of Computing and IT, Makerere University, UGANDA, e-mail: jlubega@cit.mak.ac.ug, +256-774-600884 Kathy Lynch (PhD) University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, AUSTRALIA, e-mail: KLynch1@usc.edu.au, +61-7-5456-5506