PROBLEMÁTICA DE LA LEY 1273 DE 2009

Data analysis refers to interpretation and understanding of the raw data to respond to the aims of the study and the research questions (Henning, van Rensburg & Smit, 2004). A variety of methods, including interviews, questionnaires and focus group discussions, was used to collect data. In this study, for ethical purposes, the names of the participants and faculties were not used; instead, they were given codes.

4.5.1 Interview Analysis

A tape recorder was used to record the initial interviews, since it allowed for the collection of a large volume of data. Data from the interviews were transcribed and analysed to identify the criteria for a learning styles tool relevant to the South African higher education context. This was done through selection, identifying themes and putting together information, in an organized way, in order to identify patterns and measure how frequently they occurred. The transcripts were read repeatedly in order to establish the criteria to be used for the development of the learning styles assessment tool. The main criteria that emerged were:

 Create awareness about learning styles.

 Support teaching and learning in higher education.

 Allow students to interrogate how they learn.

 Encourage interactive discussion among the students and lecturers.  

151  4.5.2 Analysis of Learning Styles Instruments

The existing instruments were analysed in order to explore the possibility either of using them as they were or of changing them. The suitability of each instrument was thus considered. Theoretical analysis of existing instruments was done to determine their uses, strengths, weaknesses, applicability, validity and reliability. Criteria recommended by the key informants were taken into account and the issues of simplicity, accessibility, and availability were also assessed. During analysis, the suitability of the instrument for the South African higher education context was considered centrally important.

4.5.3 Analysis of Writing Exercises (in learning styles tool)

In the writing exercise, preceding the completion of the questionnaire, the researcher looked for learning styles, without ignoring the impact of other issues on the students’ learning experiences. The responses from the writing exercise were analysed, themes and patterns were identified. The learning styles created the main themes, while emergent sub-themes included those of language, the role of mature students and peer pressure. This type of data analysis is referred to as concept map or pattern map (Henning, et al., 2004). The concept technique puts the main concept (in this study, that of learning styles) at the centre, and then links the other concepts to this main concept (Henning, et al., 2004). Here, the other concepts were understood in relation to learning styles.

4.5.4 Analysis of the Pilot of the Learning Styles Assessment Tool

An initial pilot of the learning styles assessment tool was conducted with six students from the six faculties at CPUT. It was then piloted with 130 students in the six faculties at the Cape Peninsula University of Technology, and was analysed by the students themselves using the score sheet provided (Appendix E). After completing the questionnaire, the students had to calculate the

scores manually. In order to identify the learning styles, the calculations required that the numbers be added and the total then multiplied by two. With the calculations, students could make mistakes and therefore fail to identify their learning styles accurately. This is recognized by Reid (1987) as one of the weaknesses of learning style assessment. To avoid the students making mistakes with their self-reports for this study, the researcher checked their calculations for accuracy and reliability. A score of between 21 and 27 for a learning style meant that this was the student’s major learning style. A major learning style is one that the student prefers to use and feels comfortable with using. A score of 12-18 meant a minor learning style; this is one that the student usually uses as a second choice, in conjunction with other learning styles. A score of between 6 and 9 meant a negligible learning style, one which the student preferred not to use.

4.5.5 Analysis of Focus Group Discussions

Discussions in focus groups were held with the students about the usefulness of learning style tools. Thematic analysis was employed for the analysis of the focus group discussions.

Transcripts were read repeatedly and themes were noted. Information gathered from the focus group discussions was analysed to establish the usefulness of the tool for typical higher education students. Most of the issues raised in the focus groups were more or less similar to those which emerged from the writing exercise.

4.5.6 Analysis of the Evaluation of the Tool

The learning styles instrument developed for this study was also evaluated by the students, lecturers and seven key informants, in order to determine its validity and reliability.

153 

The evaluations from the students were analysed statistically by counting and adding up the number of students who agreed, disagreed or were undecided about each statement. The responses from the evaluation by lecturers and key informants were analysed qualitatively. The creation of an awareness of the usefulness of the tool for both lecturers and students was considered important during these analyses.