6. NetAIDS EVALUATION
6.2 OVERALL EVALUATION OF NETAIDS
Hypothesis
One hypothesis was formulated for computer game learning object.
H: There is direct relationship between use of computer games for teaching HIV/AID prevention and improved learning outcome of HIV/AIDS education in schools
Table 6.2: Theoretical constructs for testing the latent variables under investigation
Construct Description Supporting Research
After the experiment, the students evaluated NetAIDS prototype. For category 1 questions, the questionnaires include closed questions that were designed to elicit responses related to the latent variables: the learning process, the digital learning environment and the learning outcome. Table 6.3 shows latent variables and related theoretical constructs with corresponding Cronbach’s alpha, most of the constructs were above 0.7 or very close to it, which in our opinion are good values.
Computer games for
Joseph Kizito Bada: Integrating digital learning Objects for HIV/AIDS prevention: a contextualized approach
Table 6.3: Constructs, questionnaire items and their Cronbach alphas (Bada and Suhonen, 2011c)
The descriptive statistics was used to present the results of the questionnaire. This was followed by the analysis of relations between the latent variables. The second part of the result section presents the analysis of students’ responses to open questions in the questionnaire.
Category 1: Quantitative analysis of the questionnaire
The students who participated in the experiment were teenagers from high schools. The details about their ages and sex categories are presented in Table 6.4.
Table 6.4: Demographic data of the students (Bada and Suhonen, 2011c
Table 6.5 presents summary of students’ responses for the evaluation of NetAIDS digital learning environment. From the table, it is noted that the acceptance rate of NetAIDs educational environment for HIV/AIDS preventive education is above 80%.
This gives high expectation of using this approach for HIV/AIDS education to teenage students
NetAIDS evaluation
Dissertations in Natural Sciences and Forestry No 96
59 Table 6.5: Summary of students’ responses (N=32) (Bada and Suhonen, 2011c)In the next step, the important factors that explain the variance were analyzed. Table 6.6 shows the loading of the 10 constructs. The bold-faced formatting of the numbers was added manually in Table 6.6 to emphasize the loading of the measurement items on the constructs to which they are assigned. The table also shows the individual code assigned to each of the constructs.
Table 6.6: Factor analysis and model constructs (Bada and Suhonen, 2011c)
Latent variable
Items Item
code
Factor 1 Loading
Factor 2 Loading
Factor 3 Loading Learning
process (LP)
Learning new things LP1 0.367 0.230 0.178
Easy lessons to understand LP2 0.432 0.213 0.273
Sharing ideas in online discussions
LP3 0.623 0.137 0.453
Active participation in online class
LP4 0.568 0.530 -0.016
Desire to respond to online questions
LP5 0.914 0.433 0.444
Learning outcome (LO)
Course meeting its purpose
LO1 0.164 0.482 0.045
Course attaining its goals LO2 0.460 0.872 0.213
Course meeting learners’
expectations
LO3 0.325 0.546 0.201
NetAIDS environment (NE)
Clear structure NE1 0.499 0.189 0.536
Few technical problems NE2 0.328 0.217 0.924
Joseph Kizito Bada: Integrating digital learning Objects for HIV/AIDS prevention: a contextualized approach
Next the path analysis result is presented for the ten constructs in Figure 6.4. The weights (W) assigned to the manifest variables are the item loadings on the constructs or latent variables in this case.
Figure 6.4: Direct and indirect relationship diagram (Bada and Suhonen, 2011c).
The latent variables learning process, learning outcomes and NetAIDS Environment cannot be measured directly, but manifest variables or indicators can be combined to measure each of them. Thus, to measure learning process we use LP1 (learning new things) with weight of 0.367, LP5 (desire to respond to online questions) with weight W of 0.914, similarly LP2, LP3 and LP4 are weighted in the same way. The weight of a manifest variable or observable explains the contribution of the variable to the latent variable. The latent variable NetAIDS environment is described by observables NE1 and NE2. Finally the latent variable learning outcomes is represented by manifest variables LO1, LO2 and LO3 and their corresponding weights. Table 6.7 shows measures of fit used as references for path analysis.
Table 6.7: Measures of Fit
The hypotheses H1, H2 and H3 were tested, basing on the results of the analysis, the following were discovered.
1) H1: There is direct relationship between NetAIDS environment and learning process. The path coefficient of 0.476 is good value and t-statistics 3.200 is above the cutoff value of 1.96. Therefore, the hypothesis H1 is supported.
NetAIDS evaluation
Dissertations in Natural Sciences and Forestry No 96
61 2) H2: There is direct relationship between learning process and HIV/AIDS learningoutcome. The path coefficient of 0.523 is a good value and t-statistics 3.157 is above the cutoff value of 1.96. Therefore, the hypothesis H2 is supported.
3) H3: There is no direct relationship between NetAIDS environment and learning outcome of the HIV/AIDS education. The path coefficient of 0.011 is very low value and t-statistics 0.067 is far much below the cutoff value of 1.96. Therefore, the hypothesis H3 is not supported.
The next section presents the results of analyzing students’ responses the open question in the questionnaire.
Category 2: Qualitative data analysis
Qualitative data analysis of students’ answers to open questions
Beside of the questionnaire, the students were asked a set of open questions related to the course and the use of NetAIDS environment during the course. The following themes were covered
1) Students’ expectations towards the course;
2) Students’ opinions about the aspects of the course that supported learning;
3) Students’ evaluation of games and online discussion forum components in NetAIDS;
4) Experienced learning obstacles of the NetAIDS environment; and
5) Students’ ideas related to future development of the NetAIDS environment.
The students gave the following statement concerning their expectations towards the course:
1) “Being able to link up with other schools and listen to their views and experiences regarding HIV/AIDS prevention.”
2) “To get to know the people and interact with them”
3) “Getting new friends and new ideas”
4) “To learn about AIDS and help fellow students”
5) “To learn more about AIDS”
6) “To be able to meet with other schools and discuss this topic with fellow students”
7) “To use more games in learning”
According to the students, the following aspects supported their learning in the course.
1) “The lessons on HIV/AIDS prevention.”
2) “Computer games”
3) “The Internet”
4) “Online discussion with fellow students”
5) “Guidance from tutor”
6) “Freedom to communicate with fellow students.”
Joseph Kizito Bada: Integrating digital learning Objects for HIV/AIDS prevention: a contextualized approach
In addition, the students described what they learned during the course as summarized in Table 6.8
Table 6.8: Course content learned by students
Topic What students’ learned Frequency
HIV/AIDS basic knowledge
- CD4 count
- HIV/AIDS stages of development - Body fluids that cannot transmit HIV
4 Positive living - Support for people living with HIV
- Showing brotherhood for people living with HIV/AIDS
5 3 4 Online
discussions
- Advices from fellow students in online discussions - Avoid bad groups
- Resist peer pressure to have pre-marital sex
3 4 2
Students were asked to express their opinions about online lessons and the discussion forums. The result from this is summarized in Table 6.9:
Table 6.9: Students’ comments on computer games and virtual classroom
Learning object Topic Students’ views Online
discussion forum
New ideas - Got new ideas from friends - Share ideas with friends
- Got to know what is in other people’s mind
Fun - Interesting to compose ideas and receive replies from friends in online discussion forum
- Very interesting way of learning
Learning - Learn new things from responses to students’ questions - Highly interactive and active way of learning
Anonymity - You ask questions that are very difficult to ask directly to teachers in class