In the quantitative article Ozdamli and Uzunboylu used the stratified random sampling method. The teacher sample was made up of 25% of the total number. The student sample was made up of 9% of the target population. The qualitative authors decided to use the criterion sampling strategy. The teachers that were selected had to meet the criterion of using MCDs or taught students that uses MCDs such as, cell phones, smart phones, or tablet computer for teaching or learning.
The quantitative sample used stratified sampling which is a good way to guarantee desired representation of relevant subgroups within a sample. Ozdamli and Uzunboylu hypothesizes compared the behavior between the teachers and the students for that purpose to determine the …show more content…
The teachers and students perceptions toward M-learning were both positive. The data analysis also showed both the teachers and students were moderate in self-efficacy. Teachers were above moderate level preparing lesson materials with M-learning. Teachers were at moderate level with the use of mobile phones, laptops, and mobile MP3 players. The students used mobile phones and laptop best and mobile MP3 players at a good level, iPhone, iPod, gaming console, and smart phones at a moderate level. The article revealed the students were more competent then teachers using mobile devices, and in other literature reviews students have always made better progress. To me, the research finding indicated teachers and students would be more competent to move towards M-learning. Their perceptions were positive and each group had a grasp on one or more of the mobile devices that can be used. M-learning is simply the ability to receive learning anytime, anywhere, and on any device. I do not think the conclusion should have shown teachers and students were not competence levels were not sufficient using …show more content…
I agree with the research method that was used to get the sample. I feel the qualitative article was well written. The sample size of participates was small enough to give detailed data analysis. Most of the date was collected from interviews by face-t0-face, telephone, and Skype. There are advantages to this method data collection such as, detailed questions that can be asked, further probing and complex and unknown issues explored. I would use surveys as well, because interviews can become bias. Overall, I feel the authors did well with the design, data collection, and analysis. It was very easy to
The quantitative sample used stratified sampling which is a good way to guarantee desired representation of relevant subgroups within a sample. Ozdamli and Uzunboylu hypothesizes compared the behavior between the teachers and the students for that purpose to determine the …show more content…
The teachers and students perceptions toward M-learning were both positive. The data analysis also showed both the teachers and students were moderate in self-efficacy. Teachers were above moderate level preparing lesson materials with M-learning. Teachers were at moderate level with the use of mobile phones, laptops, and mobile MP3 players. The students used mobile phones and laptop best and mobile MP3 players at a good level, iPhone, iPod, gaming console, and smart phones at a moderate level. The article revealed the students were more competent then teachers using mobile devices, and in other literature reviews students have always made better progress. To me, the research finding indicated teachers and students would be more competent to move towards M-learning. Their perceptions were positive and each group had a grasp on one or more of the mobile devices that can be used. M-learning is simply the ability to receive learning anytime, anywhere, and on any device. I do not think the conclusion should have shown teachers and students were not competence levels were not sufficient using …show more content…
I agree with the research method that was used to get the sample. I feel the qualitative article was well written. The sample size of participates was small enough to give detailed data analysis. Most of the date was collected from interviews by face-t0-face, telephone, and Skype. There are advantages to this method data collection such as, detailed questions that can be asked, further probing and complex and unknown issues explored. I would use surveys as well, because interviews can become bias. Overall, I feel the authors did well with the design, data collection, and analysis. It was very easy to