NAME AND SURNAME: TSHOLANANG MOLOTSI

STUDENT NUMBER: ST1016354

LECTURER’S NAME & SURNAME: SHELDON NAIDOO

DATE: 02 APRIL 2024

INER7411 ASSIGNMENT 1

1|Page
TABLE OF CONTENT

1. Cover page Page 1

2. Table of content page 2

3. Question 1 page 3-4

4. Question 2 page 5

5. Question 3 page 6

6. Reference list page 7

2|Page
QUESTION 1

Q. 1.1

Sarah's choice of the positivist paradigm for her study seems quite apt, especially considering
the nature of her research topic. The positivist paradigm is grounded in the belief that reality is
objective and can be discovered through empirical evidence and logical analysis. This approach
is particularly suitable for studies that aim to quantify the impact of certain variables on an
outcome, which in Sarah’s case involves assessing the impact of lecturers' use of SmartBoards
on the learning potential of students. By adopting this paradigm, Sarah can focus on objective
measurements and statistical analyses to draw conclusions, which is ideal for evaluating the
effectiveness of educational tools in a scientific manner. (Forsnot, 1996)

Given that Sarah is exploring the impact of technology in education, her study could greatly
contribute to understanding the best practices for integrating technology into teaching,
especially in the natural sciences. This could potentially pave the way for more effective
teaching strategies that enhance student engagement and learning outcomes. ( Forsnot, 1996)

Q. 1.2

If Sarah is open to exploring a different paradigm/tradition for her intended study, the
constructivist paradigm could serve as an excellent alternative. The constructivist paradigm
posits that reality is subjective and constructed by individuals based on their interactions with
the world. This approach emphasizes understanding the meanings that people assign to their
experiences, which in the context of Sarah's study, could offer deep insights into how students
perceive the use of SmartBoards in their learning process. (Forsnot, 1996)

Unlike the positivist paradigm that seeks objective truths through quantitative data, the
constructivist approach would allow Sarah to explore the qualitative aspects of her research
question. This could involve conducting interviews, focus groups, or observations to gather
students' and lecturers' perspectives on the use of SmartBoards. Such qualitative data could
uncover nuanced understandings of the educational impacts of technology that quantitative
methods might overlook. (Forsnot, 1996)

Literature that supports the use of the constructivist paradigm in educational research includes
Vygotsky's theory of social constructivism, which emphasizes the importance of social
interactions in the learning process (Vygotsky, 1978). Applying this theory, Sarah could
investigate how SmartBoards facilitate or hinder interaction in the classroom and how this
3|Page
affects learning. Furthermore, Jonassen et al. (1999) argue for the use of technology as
cognitive tools that enable constructivist learning environments, suggesting that exploring how
SmartBoards support or detract from such environments could be highly relevant.

Q. 1.3

Within the constructivist paradigm that Sarah might consider for her study, two positions
particularly stand out for refining her analytical lens: interpretivism and phenomenology. These
positions would enable a deeper and more nuanced understanding of how SmartBoards impact
learning in the natural sciences.

1. Interpretivism: This position emphasizes understanding the world from the viewpoint of the
individuals who live in it. By adopting an interpretivist approach, Sarah could delve into how
individual students and lecturers perceive and interact with SmartBoards in the learning
process. It allows for a subjective interpretation of the data collected, focusing on the meanings
participants attach to their experiences. This could be incredibly insightful for Sarah’s study as it
would enable her to understand not just the impact of SmartBoards, but how and why they are
impactful from the perspectives of those directly involved. It’s about capturing the complexity
of human behavior in educational settings, offering a rich, in-depth analysis of her data.

2. Phenomenology: This position is concerned with the lived experiences of people and how
they make sense of those experiences. By incorporating a phenomenological approach, Sarah
could explore the essence of students' and lecturers' experiences with SmartBoards in natural
science lectures. This would involve looking at the emotional, cognitive, and social dimensions
of their interactions with technology in an educational context. Phenomenology would help
Sarah to capture the essence of the educational experiences related to SmartBoards, providing
insights into how these tools influence the learning atmosphere, engagement levels, and
ultimately, the learning outcomes.

Both interpretivism and phenomenology would enable Sarah to gather deep, qualitative
insights into the educational impact of SmartBoards, offering a more holistic view than what
positivist methods might yield. They complement each other by focusing on subjective
experiences and interpretations, which are crucial for understanding the nuances of technology
integration in education.

4|Page
QUESTION 2

Q.2.1A suitable theory for Itumeleng's study is Constructivism. According to Fosnot (1996),
Constructivism emphasizes active learning, where learners construct knowledge through
experiences, interactions, and reflection. Itumeleng's approach of having learners work in small
groups to construct composite shapes aligns with the principles of Constructivism. By engaging
in hands-on activities and collaborative discussions, learners can develop a deeper
understanding of 2D shapes and their properties (Driscoll, 2000).

Q2.2: The type of theory selected is an Epistemological Theory. Epistemological theories focus
on understanding the nature of knowledge and how individuals acquire knowledge (Mayer,
2004).

Constructivism falls under this category as it emphasizes the active construction of knowledge
by learners. This theory is suitable for Itumeleng's study because it provides a framework for
understanding how learners develop their understanding of mathematical concepts through
active engagement and social interaction. The principles of Constructivism motivate Itumeleng's
choice because they highlight the importance of hands-on experiences and collaborative
learning in mathematics education, which aligns with his teaching approach (Driver et al.,
1994).

Q.2.3 Itumeleng will be utilizing an inductive approach when explaining the findings of his
study. In the context of Constructivism, the inductive approach involves analyzing specific
instances or observations to derive broader principles or theories (Creswell, 2014).

Itumeleng will likely observe the interactions and learning outcomes of students working in
small groups to construct composite shapes. From these observations, he will identify patterns
and themes, which will inform his understanding of how students learn mathematics through
hands-on, collaborative activities. Thus, Itumeleng's approach aligns with the inductive
reasoning process, where specific observations lead to general conclusions about the nature of
learning in his classroom context.(Creswell, 2014).

5|Page
QUESTION 3

Q. 3.1The alternative hypothesis for Kim's intended study could be: "There is a positive
correlation between learners' proficiency in completing crossword puzzles, wordsearches, and
riddles, and their confidence levels in successfully completing scavenger-hunt-like activities and
identifying symbols on a map."

Q. 3.2 Kim's intended research study involves exploring the relationship between learners'
proficiency in certain activities (crossword puzzles, wordsearches, and riddles) and their
confidence levels in mapwork activities. This suggests correlation rather than causality.
Correlation refers to a statistical relationship between two or more variables where changes in
one variable are associated with changes in another variable. In Kim's study, she aims to
determine if there is a relationship between learners' proficiency in certain activities and their
confidence levels in mapwork. However, completing crossword puzzles, wordsearches, and
riddles does not directly cause an increase in confidence in mapwork activities. Instead,
proficiency in these activities may be indicative of certain cognitive skills or problem-solving
abilities that could contribute to confidence in mapwork. Therefore, correlation is more
appropriate for Kim's study as she seeks to understand the relationship between these
variables without inferring causality (Gravetter & Forzano, 2018).

Q. 3.3 The null hypothesis for Kim's intended study, after her suspicion regarding learners'
confidence in engaging in mapwork has been declared invalid, could be: "There is no significant
correlation between learners' proficiency in completing crossword puzzles, wordsearches, and
riddles, and their confidence levels in successfully completing scavenger-hunt-like activities and
identifying symbols on a map."

Q. 3.4 In relation to the null hypothesis stated in question 3.3, the nature of the correlation that
exists would be non-existent or negligible. If the null hypothesis is true, it suggests that there is
no significant correlation between learners' proficiency in certain activities and their confidence
levels in mapwork. Therefore, any observed correlation would likely be due to chance rather
than a meaningful relationship between the variables (Gravetter & Forzano, 2018).

6|Page
REFERENCE LIST

Creswell, J. W. 2014. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches. 4th ed. Sage Publications.

Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. 1994. Constructing scientific knowledge
in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5–12.

Driscoll, M. P. 2000. Psychology of learning for instruction.2nd ed. Allyn & Bacon.

Fosnot, C. T. 1996. Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. Teachers College Press.

Gravetter, F. J., & Forzano, L. B. 2018)

. Research Methods for the Behavioral Sciences (5th ed.). Cengage Learning.

Mayer, R. E. 2004. Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The
case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist, 591, 14–19.

7|Page
.

8|Page