Chapter 7: Summary, Conclusion and Recommendations
4.5 Population of Study
The term “population” is the total group from or about which certain information is required to be ascertained (Banerjee and Chaudhury 2010). A research population consists of individuals or elements with similar characteristics. It also comprises of all the members of a particular group who are of interest to the researcher (Fraenkel and Wallen 2009). The sum of these elements formed the study population, which in this study includes academics, students and librarians within selected federal universities in Nigeria.
The study was conducted in two federal universities in southwest geo-political zone of Nigeria.
Universities in Nigeria can be categorized on the basis of their year of establishment, as first generation (1948 – 1973), second generation (1974-1979), third generation (1980s to early 1990s), fourth generation (1991-1998) and fifth generation (1999 to date) (Nwagwu and Agarin 2008; Ekundayo and Ajayi 2009). The universities are also categorized as broad-based
89
(that is, those that provide education in a wide-range range of disciplines) or specialized (for example, technology or agriculture education) (Ekundayo and Ajayi 2009). The University of Ibadan (UI) (first generation/broad based) and the Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta (FUNAAB) (third generation/specialized university) were used for this study. The University of Ibadan was founded in 1948 and is the oldest university in Nigeria, while FUNAAB (which was founded in 1988) is one of the specialized universities in the southwest region of Nigeria (information posted at http://universitiesofnigeria.com). These universities were also selected based on the relative variance in their rating in research productivity (Okafor 2011). Recent global ranking of universities (4International Colleges & Universities 2014; Cybermetrics Lab CSIC 2014) placed UI and FUNAAB at 2nd and 11th positions respectively among Nigerian universities. The aforementioned informed their choice for this study.
Academic staff members and undergraduate students in the faculties of Technology, Sciences and Veterinary Medicine in UI and FUNAAB formed the units of analysis. These faculties are common to the two universities. Cant and Bothma (2010) remarked that the lecturer (academic staff) is vital in the effective delivery of information content in the university and that the successful integration of technology in education is influenced by educators‟ perceptions. It is therefore important to understand academics‟ views on the use of Web 2.0 technologies in TAL. Stutzman (2006) also stated that in comparing rates of Web 2.0 adoption, undergraduate students are true representation of the feeder of Web 2.0 application. Hence, undergraduate students in the third and fourth years of study were chosen as a study sample. The decision to limit the study to third and fourth year undergraduate students was based on the fact that these students would have spent enough time in the university and as such would be able to provide valid information on the extent of using Web 2.0 technologies for TAL practices.
The population of academics in the two universities is 409 in UI and 162 in FUNNAB respectively (U.I. 2013). On the other hand, the population of third and fourth year undergraduate students is 1188 in UI and 1639 in FUNNAB (FUNAAB 2013). Hence, the total population of the study is 517 academics and 2827 undergraduate students in both universities (University of Ibadan Annual Report, 2013; FUNNAB 2012/2013 Annual Report, 2013).
90 4.6 Sampling Procedures
Sampling is the process of selecting a number from a population that will be representive of the total population (Polit and Hungler 1999). A sample is any part of a population of individuals from whom information is selected (Fraenkel and Wallen 2009). It is the actual population from which the data are obtained. A representative sample according to Denscombe (2014:32) allows the researcher to draw valid conclusions about the total research population. Sampling helps to achieve greater precision in determining sample size and to avoid bias in selecting the sample (Kumar 2005). Babbie (2007) further described a sample as any ration of the population less than the total population.
Due to the nature and objectives of this research, a representative sample for this study was used based on recommended samples sizes on a published table of determining sample sizes by Israel (1992). Israel (1992) published the table of determining sample sizes as shown in Table 2. He suggested that for a population of 517 academics and 2827 undergraduate students, the sample sizes would be 240 and 353 respectively at ±5% precision and 95% confidence level.
For this study, a sample of 240 academics and 353 undergraduate (third and fourth year) students was therefore selected out of the total population of students and academics in the faculties in the two universities.
Table 2. Sample Size confidence level is 95% and P=0.5 (Source: Israel 1992) Size of population Sample size (n) for precision (e) of:
±3% ±5% ±7% ±10%
500 A 222 145 83
600 a 240 152 86
1,000 a 286 169 91
2,000 714 333 185 95
3,000 811 353 191 97
Where a = Assumption of normal population is poor. The entire population should be sampled.
The sample for this study was distributed among the population of academics and undergraduates in the two universities based on the strength of their population using a formula recommended by Krejcie oand Morgan (1970) represented below:
N x S TP
91
Where, N is the population of each faculty, S is the total sample size and TP is the total population. Based on this formula, the distribution of samples across the two selected universities were:
University of Ibadan (Academics): 409 x 240 = 172 571
University of Ibadan (Undergraduate Students): 1188 x 353 = 148 2827
Federal University of Agriculture Abeokuta (Academics): 162 x 240 = 68
571
Federal University of Agriculture Abeokuta (Undergraduate Students): 1639 x 353 = 205
2827
Thus, the sample size for the survey was 172 academics and 148 students from UI and 68 academics and 205 students from FUNAAB. Using the same formula as above, the distribution of samples across the selected faculties for the study was calculated as follows:
University of Ibadan:
Faculty of Science (Academics): 225 x 172= 95 409
Faculty of Science (Undergraduate Students): 684 x 148= 85 1188
The sample sizes for other faculties were based on a similar calculation as shown in Table 3a and Table 3b.
Table 3a: Sample distribution of University of Ibadan: Academics/students Faculty/College Academics Undergraduate students
Population Sample Population Sample
Science 225 95 684 85
Technology 100 42 420 52
Veterinary 84 35 84 11
Total 409 172 1188 148
92
Table 3b: Sample distribution of Federal University of Agriculture Abeokuta:
Academics/students
Faculty/ College Academics Undergraduate students Population Sample Population Sample
Science 108 45 1349 169
Technology 36 15 231 29
Veterinary 18 8 59 7
Total 162 68 1639 205
The two universities for the study were selected using the purposive sampling technique to ensure that one university is selected from each of the two strata (that is, first generation/broad- based and third generation/specialized universities. In systematic sampling, a random selection is made of the first element for the sample and then, using a fixed interval, consequent elements are selected until the desirable sample size is reached (Daniel 2012). Using the systematic sampling technique, sample units for the quantitative study were drawn from a list of academic staff until the sample size noted in Table 3a and Table 3b was reached. Third and fourth year undergraduate students were purposively selected for the quantitative study.
Systematic sampling was further applied to include undergraduates in the study. With regard to student population, the researcher went to the lecture hall where third and fourth year students in each of the selected faculties receive lectures and the allotted number of questionnaires were administered to every 8th person until the sample size was reached. The procedure was followed for the three faculties surveyed.
In the case of the qualitative aspect of the study, Marshall, Cardon, Poddar and Fontenot (2013) recommend 15 to 30 interviews. Since the qualitative data was intended to be used to support findings from the quantitative study, a purposive sampling technique was employed in selecting participants. A total of 16 participants comprising of 8 faculty heads and 8 faculty librarians from the faculties of Science, Agriculture, Technology and Veterinary in UI and FUNAAB were selected to participate in the qualitative study.