Procesamiento de huellas labiales

The research design is predominantly quantitative data with some qualitative data from responses to open-ended questions. This research followed the four phases of evaluation research as determined by Polit and Beck (2016). These include establishing the evaluation research objectives, measuring the success of the research, the data collection and storage phase and, lastly, the analyses of the data collected.

4.4.1 Phase I: Evaluation Research Objective

The purpose of this research was to assess the Read On! programme and the experiences of students in years 2013 and 2014. Students completed an individual screening and assessment in the Read On! programme with measurable outcomes. After the assessment, students were then placed into an appropriate level in the programme. For the repeating students’ cohort it was compulsory to practice in Read On! with a view to helping students to improve their reading and writing skills. This research sought to determine that outcome.

4.4.2 Phase II: Measuring the Research Success

The second of the four phases comprised the means used to measure the success of the programme (Polit and Beck, 2016). Consequently, for this research, data were drawn from first year and the repeating student samples only for 2013 and 2014.

50

The questionnaire section of the data were drawn from 2013 and 2014 CG student responses who practiced in Read On! Data were drawn from a questionnaire administered in 2013 and 2014. The data from the 2013 and 2014 survey questions were analysed as one data set.

Data which contributed to the analysis in this section comprised gender distribution, home language, Read On! screening and assessment outcomes, duration of practice time (in minutes) in the Read On! programme and end of year academic results obtained by students’ levels placed in the programme in 2013 and 2014 and follow-up responses.

4.4.3 Phase III: Data Collection and Storage

The following data were collected for the VG students: entry data scores especially for the NBT Academic Literacy (NBTal%) used for first year students in both years, the Composite Index (CIn%) and Academic Index (AIn%) and NSC scores for Grades 11 and 12 in 2013 and 2014 and the Read On! data for the VG and CG students for 2013 and 2014.

As discussed in detail on page 12, the NBTal% is an educational test designed to measure the students’ academic reading, writing, vocabulary and comprehension skills. In short, in academic literacy students make meaning from academic text, understand vocabulary related to academic study and use evidence from academic texts to support claims, draw inferences and arrive at conclusions. The scores used in this research were obtained from NBT tests which university students sat in the years prior to admission in 2013 and 2014.

In terms of Read On!, data are produced from the screening and assessment that students attend during the first year of study. This data, in alphabetical name sets, were assigned to the relevant corresponding student’s NBT data and thereafter each student’s complete set of data were allocated a random unique number. The Read On! screening and assessment outcomes were given as a percentage. From these and the first year entry level scores, the mean and

51

standard deviation were calculated for the entire group by year and by degree. Academic end of year outcomes data of the first year student cohort admitted to university and all students repeating a year of study in 2013 and 2014 who undertook the Read On! screening and assessment were gathered.

Likert-scale data from questionnaires distributed at the end of 2013 and 2014 were gathered and analysed for the readmitted student group. Statistical analysis was made of the Likert- scale questionnaire only for those students who were practising students. Thematic analysis was undertaken of the open-ended questions in the questionnaire.

To ensure the confidentiality of the data at all times during data collection and analysis, all hard copy data were retained in a lockable cupboard in the researcher’s office. Soft copies were maintained on the researcher's computer with a confidential password known only to the researcher. Anonymity and confidentiality was maintained for all students in the study by assigning random unlinked numbers to student data and no student names or student numbers were used.

4.4.4 Phase IV: Data Analysis

The data analysis was undertaken in four stages.

Firstly, data were analysed for all first year students in 2013 and 2014 using academic entry level data, Read On! screening and assessment outcomes and end-of-year results. Secondly, an analysis was made of Read On! assessment scores and academic data from those students who were repeating a year (any year of study) and who had been placed into the programme to practice further following screening and assessment.

Thirdly, the anonymous, voluntary questionnaire to determine the perceptions of the Read On! included a set of questions that required responses using a Likert-scale and open-ended

52

questions. The data were elicited from the questionnaire given to students who practiced in Read On! in the years 2013 and 2014. In the comparison of Likert-scale groups, Boone and Boone (2012) argue that “[t]he analyses of Likert-type and Likert-scale data require unique data analysis procedures ...” (p.3) and their method was used to analyse this data.

Polit and Beck (2016) remind the researcher that the responses to open-ended qualitative questions can often offer a deeper amount of insight and flexibility to the research at hand. Thematic analysis allows for “ ... identifying, analysing, and reporting patterns (themes) within data” (Braun and Clarke, 2006, p.79). Descriptive and thematic analysis, drawing on the Braun and Clarke (2006) six-phase analysis guide and applying a theoretical approach (Tuckett, 2005) allowed for the identification of themes from the 2013 and 2014 questionnaire data. These phases included: Transcribing and acquainting oneself with the data, listing preliminary codes, identifying themes, refining the themes, defining and allocating names to the themes and finally selecting extracts and drawing parallels to the research and the literature by producing the report (Tuckett, 2005; Braun and Clarke, 2006).