Dissertation/Extended Curriculum Development Project Module
Study Plan
1. Student: (name)	Reinder Vrielink
2. First Supervisor: (name)	Eric Siebenheller
3. 2nd Supervisor: (name)
4. Title: (proposed title)	Do pupils like working with Blackboard? A comparative investigation among pupils from the Zernike College (Groningen/Haren) age 12-18 and USA students age 18-20 in higher education with the Technician Acceptance Model
5. Overall aim:	September 2002 I started my study: MSc in e-learning, multimedia and consultancy at the Sheffield Hallam University in cooperation with the Hogeschool Arnhem/Nijmegen. The curriculum consist six modules. For the fifth module, named Project Studies, I did a “stage” at the Zernike College (Groningen/Haren, the Netherlands) in which I integrate the first three modules (Open and Flexible Learning Environment, Digital Multimedia Application and Communication, Consultancy and Change). I did a quantitative research among management, staff and teachers on the efficiency of the use of Blackboard. In this research, for the sixth module named Dissertation, I shall focus on the pupils.
6. Key research questions or goals of the study: (3-5 ideally)	Do pupils like to work with Blackboard? What is the key factor? Is there a difference between pupils in lower classes (age 12-15) or upper classes (age 16-18)? Is there a difference between students in higher education and pupils at a secondary school?
7. Research methodology and methods: (brief outline)	I constructed a questionnaire in Dutch for pupils according the research of Yi (Yi et al., 2003). I had a try out among peers (2004). I learned that TAM is good but to avoid social answers and to be sure of a double check, I had to mix up the questions. At the top of the questionnaire the pupil could fill in their name, age, class, mal or female. Also was a question “Since when do you use Blackboard. All the questionnaire items used an 11-point Likert-type scale where 0=completely disagree, 5=neither agree nor disagree, and 10=completely agree. This is ethical because pupils are not forced to choose. They can choose for the middle. Hundred questionnaires were put away at the “Junior College – Rummerinkhof – Haren” (VMBO classes 1 and 2 and HAVO/VWO classes 1, 2 and 3) and hundred questionnaires were put away at the “Studiehuis – Westerse Drift – Haren (HAVO/VWO classes 4, 5 and 6). The questionnaires are analysed with SPSS
8. Brief overview of relevant literature (500 words max. plus a bibliography which may be attached as a separate sheet)	1. Albirini, Abdulkafi. Teachers’ attitudes toward information and communication technologies: the case of Syrian EFL teachers. Computer&Education. 2005. 2. Bennett John and Bennett Linda. A review of factors that influence the diffusion of innovation when structuring a faculty-training program. The Internet and Higher Education Volume 6, Issue 1 , 1st Quarter 2003, Pages 53-63 3. Clark, R.E. Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445-459. 1983. 4. Crotty Teri, Ph. D. Constructivist theory unites distance learning and teacher education. Ames Teacher Education Center, University of Winconsin. 5. Davis F.D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 13 (1989), pp. 319–339. 6. Davis F.D., Bagozzi R.P and. Warshaw P.R, Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 22 (1992), pp. 1111–1132. 7. Davis. F.D. User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man–Machine Studies 38 (1993), pp. 475–487. 8. Deinum, Jan Folkert. Brainbox reportage 1; Implementatie en knelpunten. Rijks Universiteit Groningen January 2003. 9. Deinum, Jan Folkert. Brainbox rapportage 2; Ervaringen van docenten en leerlingen. Rijks Universiteit Groningen June 2003. 10. Deinum, Jan Folkert. Brainbox rapportage 3; Statistieken en eindconclusie. Rijks Universiteit Groningen November 2003. 11. Deprez, Isabel et.al. Van Blackboard naar Poincare. Rapport keuze en implementatie teleleerplatform VUB. Onderwijsvernieuwing&onderwijsservicecentrum VUB. April 2004. 12. Gulikers, Judith T.M., Bastiaens, Theao J., Martens, Rob L. in press. Computers in Human Behaviour. Elsevier 2004. 13. Helder, Anke. Brainbox vervangt het boek. Van 12 tot 18 February 2004 14. Kanselaar, Gellof. Invoering Blackboard. Intervieuw. Onderwijs Expertise Centrum. Faculteit sociale wetenschap Universiteit Utrecht 31 juli 2004. 15. Kirschner, Paul. Kiss my ELO (good bye). http://www.edusite.nl/edusite/columns/13961 7/12/2004 16. Laanpere, Mart. Pedagogical foundations of Web-based learning management systems: a comparative analysis. Seminar Thursday 27 January 2005 (Sheffield/Nijmegen). 17. Liao, Yuennkuany Cliff. Effects of computer assisted instruction on students’ achievement in Taiwan: A meta analysis. Computer&Education. 2005. 18. Oudshoorn, Ton. Ict-in de praktijk. Van – 12 – 18. Nr 1. February 2004. 19. Puijenbroek van, Karel. E-learning binnen het hoger onderwijs in Vlaanderen. http://www.e-learningplaza.nl/ELP2/includepagina.asp?url=/elp2/nieuws/nieuws.asp?nr=864 20. Sanden van der Johan. Leerzame loopbanen in het beroepsonderwijs. VMBO-reeks nr. 26. MesoConsult B.V. Tilburg mei 2004. 21. Seagal, Sandra & Horn, David (1997). Human Dynamics. A New Framework for Understanding People and Realizing the Potential in My Organizations. Pegasus Communications, inc. Cambridge. 22. Selim, Hassan M. An empirical investigation of student acceptance of course websites. Computers in Education 40(2003)343-360. 23. Siekkinen, Pertti. Background and milestones for ICT policy development; Adopting ICT in Finnish education & “Moore’s Gap”; A presentation at Helsinki Education Department (Media Centre Kuutio) 10 march 2000. 24. Souleles Nicos. A prescriptive study of early trends in implementing e-learning in the UK Higher Education Sector. http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum/paper78. February 2004
9. Action plan: (a programme of work with a view to submission by the end of 2005)	a) Date: (date started)	b) Activity: (what will you do)		c) Timescale: (when completed by)
	July 2004	Translating questionnaires		August 2004
	Sept – November 2004	Put away questionnaires		December 2004
	January 2005	Literature study		May 2005
	February 2005	Installing SPSS		February 2005
	March 2005	Learning to work with SPSS		March 2005
	April 2005	Making analysis		30 April 2005
	May 2005	Writing paper		1 June 2005
10. Research ethics: (Include a short statement of how you intend to ensure that your proposed study will conform to the principles outlined in the Sheffield Hallam Research Ethics policy)	This research will be undertaken in accordance with commonly agreed standards of good practice such as are laid down in the Declaration of Helsinki. Both in the organisation of the questionnaire and interviews I shall be aware of ethical issues. Naturally, all participants must be voluntary. I shall give guarantees about confidentiality and anonymity of pupils, teachers, and school. I shall gain submission for the research from the management of the school, the teachers involved and the pupils. All participants will be informed that the results will only used within the closed Blackboard environment of my study and during my presentation for my dissertation. For any kind of publication of the results, I need permission from the management of the school.
11. Keywords: (list Keywords that apply to your project)	Blackboard, TAM (Technical Acceptance Model), pupils from a secondary school, ease of use, usefulness, enjoyment
12. Start/End Dates:	a) Start Date:		b) End Date: (proposed)
	1 July 2004		1 June 2005

13. Approval of proposed study programme
Signed (Module Leader):	Date:
Signed (First Supervisor):	Date:
Signed (Student):	Date:

Note: Please provide completed forms Module Leader, Supervisor and post a copy to your individual area on the Blackboard Site.