Google Apps As A Teaching Aid Education Essay

Following the recent move by the Ministry of Education(MOE) in Singapore to adopt Google Apps Education Edition in both primary and secondary schools, this paper aims to look into whether the use of Google Apps for educators would actually benefit teachers as a better form of communication and collaboration tool. The research is drawn upon concepts from the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Framework (TPCK) to develop a deeper understanding between the complex relationship of technology, the content and pedagogy among teachers. Considering how much technology is evolving in the 21st century, building a collaborative and interactive form of communication would allow students to learn more effectively and break the communication barrier. Findings suggest that the use of Google Apps for Educators provide benefits to teachers if they’re used correctly and meaningfully considering the functions, teaching methods and contents that the teachers are delivering to the students.

Google Apps Education Edition is a set of complete solution with both collaboration tools and communication tools. Without the use of complicated software and hardware, Google Apps work through the idea of using a browser to login using an email address and password. (Educause Learning Initiative, 2008) Google Apps Education Edition provides options such as collaborative tools, for students and teachers to edit, comment and share documents among each other (Ina Blau, Avner Caspi, 2009). In an education context, it would seem ideal for students and teachers to collaborate with each other, which would encourage a healthy learning environment. (Tal-Elhasid and Meishar-Tal, 2007).

In Singapore, with high speed broadband services recently introduced, it would create an ideal environment for Web 2.0 services to surface. Web 2.0 allows users to break away from the traditional method of web pages, where users would only be able to browse and view content. Users would now be able to create and facilitate the content that they wish to display. (Mohd Nazri et al, 2009) Google Apps for Educators is one of the Web 2.0 services that Google provides for free in schools ranging from universities, primary and secondary schools.

Google Apps Education Edition also provides tools to create a web page with more relevant content with relation to the school (Educause Learning Initiative, 2008). With an own domain name added as a feature, it would create a site that feels closer to the brand of the school as well. Google Apps Education Edition is available free for non-profit organizations, schools and universities as well. In addition, this application does not require any additional hardware or software to be installed into the schools. (Oishi, 2007) This provides several benefits to schools which would be discussed in the literature review. The idea of online collaboration has encouraged the Ministry of Education in Singapore to partner up with NCS Pte Ltd(A Large IT organization In Singapore) and Google to implement its collaborative system across 30 000 schools in Singapore(Ministry of Education, 2009). This implementation process would be in line to create better quality workforce which would ultimately increase Singapore’s competitiveness over the globe. (Ministry of Education, 2009)

1.1 Aim and Scope

The aim of this project is to focus on helping teachers communicate and collaborate effectively using Google Apps. Given the trend of adopting Google Apps following the ongoing implementations from the MOE in Singapore, there is also a need for teachers to understand that they do not need to learn how to use or teach the technology. Instead, they are required to know how to harness the technology for a more efficient use (Roger Nevin, 2010). However, schools are still met with the challenge of nurturing a pioneer batch of teachers to teach using Web 2.0 technologies and in addition, there is also little research on transforming the methods of using technology to collaborate in schools.

Based upon a framework by Punya and Matthew on the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Framework (TCPK), it helps to provide teachers to integrate technology effectively into a pedagogical environment. So far, no research has been conducted in Singapore to prove that Google Apps would necessity create a collaborative environment and open up communication links for teachers and students in school. The use of collaboration and communication tools would provide the foundation to deliver rich and relevant content to students. Even with Google Apps opening up more pedagogy possibilities, it would seem that teachers would also need to understand what this system can offer to them and their students. Therefore, there is a need for schools to understand the implications behind adopting Google Apps in school and also, the continual use of the system. Using a combination of research methodologies with survey and interviews, the aim is to find out how teachers would be able to harness the use of Google Apps for Educators to provide quality education to students. It also provides an understanding towards the complex relationship between the pedagogy, content and technology. (Punya and Matthew, 2006)

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Google Apps for educators is one of the services that Google provides to school for free. The following sections would discuss the rise of cloud computing and Web 2.0 tools, followed by why schools are moving towards cloud computing and summarised with what Google Apps for Educators can provide for schools.

2.1 The rise of cloud computing and Web 2.0

In an opening speech By IDA CEO at CloudAsia 2010, traditional models where IT operations and services are all implemented within the same environment have been replaced by 3rd party vendors. (IDA website, 2010) According Business Week on the article (How Cloud Computing Is Changing the World) Companies such as IBM and Hewlett Packard (HP) are also moving in the direction of cloud computing. For example, HP has recently opened a research laboratory in February 2010, in support of delivering cloud services to enterprises (Computerworld, 2010). In addition, UniSIM, who is another adopter of the Cloud computing service, has also shown a significant amount of savings from adopting cloud computing services. These examples signify a trend that larger organizations are taking on providing cloud computing services, and on top of that, organizations that choose to adopt these services to

2.2 Reasons why schools are moving towards cloud computing

As industries require the frequent access of services, they would also need the services to be available whenever customer requires of it (Rajkumar Buyya et al). Cloud computing services such as Google Apps including Gmail (Google Mail), Google Calendar and Google Talk offers several benefits. One of the reasons includes not having a need to place a huge amount of investments onto computer hardware and server configurations. There is no longer a need to dedicate space just for hardware. Instead, schools can just ‘plug into’ the cloud easily (Won Kim, 2009). In addition, it would also reduce the need to re-architecture the entire system infrastructure if required (Ministry of Education, 2009)

Education institutions might not have the infrastructure and resources to run Collaborative or e-learning systems. (Paul Pocatilu et al, 2009) Therefore, instead of going through the hassle of obtaining resources, institutions can now concentrate on building up content and managing these contents. The idea of accepting the need to collaborate together would encourage members to work towards achieving quality content.

2.3 The use of Google Apps for Educators in schools

It is important for teachers to understand the usefulness of adopting Google Apps. However, there might be resistance towards adopting technology for teachers as they might not see technology as a driver towards providing quality education for students (Teo, 2006). The use of these technologies will ideally give the schools more focus in providing quality education, removing the need to focus on other technical aspects (Miliband, 2004). Teachers will no longer be constrained by the traditional methods of teaching (Kuhn, 1970) using chalk, textbooks, notepads, pens and pencils. Instead, the collaborative environment provides a channel for students and teachers to share knowledge among each other and forming a virtual community among themselves (Maged N Kamel Boulos, Et Al 2006), which eliminates the problem of boundaries and distances. Web 2.0 content allows a break away from the traditional content of pages. Instead, pages are now replaced with contents that are written by users. These are known as post (Bryan Alexander, 2006). Contents can now be written by users and tailored towards the needs of the school. Without any programming knowledge, students and teachers can now create web pages and display them easily (Mohd Nazri et al, 2009).

However, there would still be a need to address the information obtained from the Internet (Wallace, 2004). As the students might not fully understand certain concepts of theories, therefore the teacher would act as a mentor to guide these students. The teachers would also act as drivers for the use of Web 2.0(i.e. Google Apps) to make the students more eager to use these collaborative tools as well (Mohd Nazri et al, 2009).

In order for collaboration and communication to happen successfully, it would take a significant amount of time and effort for users to do so. (Barbara et al, 2009) Users must be able to overcome the uncertainty that the technology might offer. It is important for teachers to understand how to use the technology and not spend time on learning and teaching it. (Roger Nevin, 2010) Schools and system implementers must recognise that technology brings about uncertainty to users as well. As described in an article by Tatikonda and Rosenthal,

Chapter3: Research Framework

The framework proposed for this research topic would be the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge or TPCK by Punya Mishra and Matthew J. Koehler (2005). This framework involves the interactions and connections between technology, content and pedagogy.

The first intersection would be the intersection between Pedagogy and content knowledge, or Pedagogy Content Knowledge (PCK) framework proposed by Shulman in the mid 1980s. Pedagogy as quoted by Koehler et al (2007) would refer to the following:

Process and practice or methods of teaching and learning, including the purposes, values, techniques or methods used to teach, and strategies for evaluating the student learning.

Content by Koehler et al (2007) would refer to the subject or module that is taught and learnt. For example, it could refer to a mathematics subject or a science subject that the teachers are required to understand and teach. Therefore, according to Shulman, content and pedagogy cannot be treated separately in isolation, both should be organized together to provide a structure on how it should be presented. (Punya and Matthew, 2006) Therefore, contents should be organized and taught according to the needs of students in order for them to interpret the content better.

Punya and Matthew (2006) extended this model by integrating technology into the framework, as the uses of technology in schools seem inevitable, because it changes our routines and practices in everyday work. (Punya and Matthew, 2006) Technology in this framework would refer to technologies such as chalk, books and blackboard, as well as the more advanced technologies such as the Internet, videos and many others that provide aid in representing the information presented. (M.J. Koehler et al, 2007)

Teachers would now be required to operate using computers, learn to use different operating systems and make use of the internet to search for relevant content. However, any institution who wishes to do that faces dilemmas and potential issues concerning costs, scalability, reliability and effectiveness. (Hagit Meishar-Tal et al, 2008)

The interplay and interconnection between the models are important in this framework. Teachers might not be able to fully utilise the technology that is given to them, that is why introducing technology alone might not be enough. According to Koehler et al (2007), as quoted

The TPCK would not only provide a clear approach in teaching, but also an analytic lens for studying the development of teacher’s knowledge about technology.

The framework would provide teachers in understanding more about Google Apps for Educators, including its benefits and flaws. It would also provide an approach for teachers to use the technology to teach students in classrooms organise events using Google Calendar or communicate with peers using Google Mail (Gmail).

3.1 A need for technology integration in Pedagogy

Drawing concepts from the of the PCK framework, Punya and Matthew developed the TPCK framework, which incorporates technology into the current PCK framework. Technology provides an approach to apply pedagogical techniques. It provides teachers with different and constructive ways to teach students and cater to their different needs. (Punya and Matthew, 2008) For example, there are now online media content to provide to students, to give them an alternative explanation for the same content that they might find difficulty in understanding. Technology would also serve as a driver towards addressing the problems that students face while learning content that was presented by teachers

In order for teachers to effectively use Google Apps for Educators as an education tool, the area of pedagogy, technology and content would have to be addressed. Koehler et al (2007) has also argued that teaching with technology would is indeed a complex and multi-dimensional. As technology can be suitable to an individual than another (Koehler et al, 2005), an understanding towards integrating technology with content and pedagogy is more substantial than treating it as an individual category. (Lenna and Mia, 2010) Certain applications from Google Apps might be deemed more useful to one school over another. Technology must have an impact on teachers as educational aids, (Zhao, 2003) as it provides a more collaborative environment in learning with feedbacks among teachers and students. (Lenna and Mia 2010) Schools must work towards harnessing the use of technology to aid teachers in providing students more richer and meaningful experiences in classrooms. (Lenna and Mia, 2010)

Figure 1: Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Framework (TPCK)

3.2 The ever changing technological roles of teachers.

With the introduction of the internet, students are able to access current information that forces teachers to rethink their core pedagogical knowledge that they held throughout their teaching years. (Wallace, 2004) They would have to constantly think of ideas with new technologies emerging in the education environment. For instance, videos obtained through the internet might prove to be more relevant to the subject and informative over the use of textbooks at times. It forces teachers to question themselves over their pedagogical knowledge and to deal with the three factors (pedagogy, content and technology knowledge) (Peruski and Mishra, 2004)

Chapter 4: Research Method

To understand the context of collaboration on what it offers to both teachers and students, 2 methods would be used. These include

Structured questionnaires

Clarification with teachers on understanding the use of Google Apps

These methods would assume that teachers and students would all have knowledge of using a computer and Google Apps in particular. It will assume that the focus group will be on schools that have adopted Google Apps Education Edition in their schools. This is in tune with the TPACK framework proposed by Mishra and Koehler (2006), which suggest that teachers simply needed to be trained in order to use the technology

4.1 Structured Questionnaire

A qualitative analysis on teachers would be done for 10 teachers that are selected based upon the surveys that were given to them previously. A structured questionnaire was prepared for the teachers who were using Google Apps in their schools. They would be briefed on the category of questions that would be presented to them. However, they would not be aware of the questions proposed for this research. Interviewing the teachers would allow a deeper understanding on how different teachers have seen themselves prior the use of Google Apps for Educators and were they able to use technology to provide richer and meaningful content to students. The interview would gather a relationship between the use of technology, the contents (subject) and the pedagogy (teaching method) that the teachers would adopt, given the technology that are available for them in Google Apps. Questions would be attached in the appendixes, some of the samples include:

If you were to teach the same subject again, would you use Google Apps as a form of communication or collaboration tool to enhance your quality of teaching?

Have your roles of a teacher changed with the use of technology?

What teaching goals would you have now with the pedagogical and technological shifts?

However, understanding that when using online surveys, the number of people who respond to the survey might be low as they might be unaware of it (Tan and Teo, 2000), printed copies of the surveys are being distributed to selected schools who have adopted Google Apps for Educators as well. The hard copies would be keyed into the online survey after all of them have been done. The data would be collected and analysed based on the hypothesis given in the framework.

4.2 Interview with teachers

Based on the questionnaire that was given to each respondent, inaccurate answers may surface. (Ian Brace) Therefore, to obtain the best answers, an interview using email address or instant messaging would be used. This would clarify any vague answers that the respondents might provide after they have finished with the survey.

Chapter 5: Findings

The online questionnaire was conducted using SurveyMonkeys. A total of 10 responses were collected in the structured questionnaire. The teachers were told to fill up their email address and name for further clarifications if needed. This is done because answers maybe vague and difficult to understand.

5.1 Structured Questionnaire

Out of the original 15 people that were given the questionnaire to do, 5 were omitted from the questionnaire. 2 of them do not use Google Apps in their school. The remaining 3 had no knowledge over Google Apps. The remaining respondents were comfortable with the use of Web 2.0 tools and Google Apps for Educators.

The following diagram would which Google application that they are using.

Figure 1Number of teachers using Google Apps

9 (90%) respondents stated that they do not use Google Docs as a teaching or learning tool in school. Only 1 of them has stated that he used Google Docs as a teaching or learning tool. 7 (70%) respondents stated that they would make changes to the subject if they were using Google Apps.

8 (80%) respondents do not feel that there were any changes in experience in roles prior the adoption of Google Apps. However, one of the respondents commented that their roles have widened. He/she is now in charge of creating content and managing the school’s Google site. The other commented that there are now more hands on training and self guided learning for the teachers. Upon further clarifications, he mentioned that teachers have to learn how to orientate the students around using Google Applications such as Gmail and Google Documents.

After the first phase of questionnaire given, these teachers were also asked to complete another short survey, which requires them to answer on their uses on Google Calendar and Mail as they were the popular choices. This process is done after the first set of questionnaire, in order to reduce the amount of data and the time wastage on teachers. Only the teachers that use these applications were given the survey to do.

Google Calendar and Gmail will be broken down individually and data on what uses teachers have for these applications will be included for the findings. They can have multiple uses for different calendars from different groups. For example, a teacher can use Google Calendar for Booking services, CCA schedules and personal organization calendar.

Figure 2 Uses for Google Calendar

Figure 2: Uses for Google Calendar

Figure 2 shows teachers’ various uses for Google Calendar (n =8). As seen in the graph, the popular uses for the Calendar would point mostly to personal organization (87.5%) and CCA schedules (62.5%).

Figure 3 Users of Google Mail (Gmail)

Figure 3 show that teachers have many uses for emails (n=9). Based figure 3, teachers have more uses for Gmail as a communication tool to communicate with peers (77.8% for group discussions, 100% for communicating with peers). These may include sharing documents or reference materials if needed. Others would include attaching documents and references for students if they are unclear of any topics in a subject.

5.2 Interview with Teachers

Teachers have responded their views on Google Apps for Educators based on the questionnaires answers that were collected. Out of the 10 who responded to the survey, 5 were further questioned for clarification as they provided vague answers for some of the questions. The teachers were also asked on how they and their peers would use Google Apps as well. Email and instant messaging were used to communicate with these teachers for further clarifications.

One of the teachers who commented on the change of roles was asked about whether he uses his school’s Google site to provide extra online material for students. He acknowledged the use of Google site provided alternative mode of teachings by providing students with online videos and diagrams to help reinforce the student with regards to the subject. In addition, he was able to provide feedback on the site as well.

Another teacher who mentioned over the use of Google Apps to consolidate information was asked on what applications she used from Google to provide the consolidation. She mentioned consolidation of documents using Google Docs for the use of planning of events.

The third teacher was asked over the use of Google Docs as he was the only one who acknowledged the use of it. He was asked on what subject did he used Google Docs for and what are the benefits and drawbacks that Google docs have for the teachers and students. The remaining teachers who needed further clarifications provided non elaborative answers to questions on such as change of roles of teachers after the implementation of Google Apps.

Chapter 6: Analysis

This section would describe the overall findings that are related to the technological pedagogy, technological and content, technological pedagogical content knowledge. This is in relation to the diagram that was proposed in the TPACK framework by Mishra and Koehler. In addition, an analysis on teacher’s role as proposed by Leanna et al would also be used in this analysis.

6.1 An understanding between technology and pedagogy

As quoted by Mishra and Koehler (2006), technological pedagogical knowledge is:

“Knowledge of the existence, components, and capabilities of various technologies as they are used in teaching and learning settings, and conversely, knowing how teaching might change as the result of using particular technologies”

The use of Gmail provided a communication channel for teachers to communicate and provide feedback to students. However, one teacher commented that the students use their personal emails to ask questions instead of using the email that was provided by the school. One of the reasons that students do so is because they constantly forget their password and require the Technical Support in the school to help reset their password. Therefore, to save the hassle of retrieving the school’s email account password, students prefer to use their own personal email to contact the teachers instead.

In addition, the use of Google Docs are more prominent in areas of Co-Circular Activities, which points to students taking part in extra activities such as Scouts, swimming clubs, etc. One of the teachers commented that he would ask their students to work on posters for promotional campaigns and would constantly feedback to the students on areas of improvement as well. He also mentioned that it saves the time and hassle of meeting up with the students unnecessarily and students are able to make changes quicker. The use of Google Docs has allowed students to constantly reflect and work on areas of improvement.

6.2 Technology and Content

Nine of the teachers interviewed have acknowledged that they use online media content in their daily teachings. As one of the teachers commented:

There is a great variety and influx of educational tools online. All subjects use online content, especially in the case of Geography, where students can be shown animations and videos to understand concepts better.

This would signal a need to manage the contents that are available online. This is an advantage that Google sites would provide for the school, to manage the vast amount of content for teachers to relate to the students using it. Similarly, another commented:

They understand better as they can see videos that can trigger their prior knowledge. It is very good for visual and audio learners to construct abstract images to learn better.

Most teachers acknowledged that technology can help provide new and more varied representations and greater flexibility in navigating across contents. (Mishra and Koehler, 2006) However, the use of Google Sites as a content management tool is absent in the teachers that were given the questionnaire. There was only one respondent who acknowledged that he learnt to consolidate information on a singular platform for easier use. In addition, out of the fifteen respondents that were originally surveyed, 30% of the respondents did not know about Google Apps for Educators or were not using it. Additional third party content are sometimes available for primary schools to use, it provides the teachers with interactive content to teach students:

Yes, it provides the students some fun and games with maths and science questions as well. My students love playing some of the games there. It helps to strengthen their knowledge as well.

6.3 Technology, Pedagogy, Content

Koehler et al (2007) mentioned the use of technology can form constructive ways of imparting knowledge to students. However, the use of Google Apps as a pedagogical tool seemed absent. Students rarely enquire teachers over subject matters as most of them prefer to ask teachers in school. The use of Gmail is only prominent in areas where teachers can communicate and plan events among one another. The use of Google Apps seemed to act as an effective communication and collaboration tool among teachers instead. As one teacher comments:

The use of Google Apps is not pervasive in classrooms yet. However, it is becoming a popular tool among peers to organize events.

Similarly, another teacher comments:

I usually use the Google Calendar to plan upcoming events that are happening in school. Teachers in schools are all able to see what the latest events in school are.

Six respondents have acknowledged that they use Google sites to provide different representations of the same subject as additional materials for students. One of which comments:

I use Google sites to embed online video and diagrams. They are told before the end of lesson to access the school’s Google site to watch additional videos. Because sometimes they just prefer to hear someone else teach them the same thing again.

Others (30%) chose to bring a laptop to class to show the students a different representation of the same subject. However, they did not use Google sites to access the school’s online video contents. Instead, they access online video content from YouTube or by using search engines. There is still a use of technology to provide different representations of the same subject, but the use of search engines provide better video contents over the ones that may be available on the school’s Google site:

I have different views on how I should teach Geography in class. Sometimes, searching the internet for contents provide my students with better quality videos. I usually search for videos using YouTube so that I can show my students several videos at one go.

6.3.1 Impact on teachers roles

Eight of the teachers (80%) see no changes in roles after the implementation of Google Apps. However, one of the teachers commented the following:

Now I would have to maintain the Google site for my school, I would have to ensure that students and teachers would be able to assess all the required files on the website. I had to go through stages of implementation as teachers constantly feedback the flaws and problems they encounter while using the school’s Google site.

An integration of technology into teaching can change the role of teachers. In this instance, the teacher’s role has developed into a content provider as well. The teacher would now be in charge of managing a website as well. Google has allowed this teacher to easily build up content that would be available for peers and students, and with feedback from peers, the content can be constantly changed to cater to the needs of the school.

All the teachers have responded that they would now have to adopt the role of teaching the students how to use the applications. As one teacher commented:

There are more hands on and self guided learning for the students in school now.

Although teachers did not feel a change in roles, further clarification with all of the teachers has shown that because they were fairly comfortable with the use of technology, they did not see a significant impact on a change of roles as teachers. One commented:

There are IT trainers that are stationed in schools to provide us with help whenever possible. There is also the Technical Assistant (also known as Information Technology (IT) Support) available each time I give him a call.

There is also the availability of IT support when teachers require assistance. Therefore, whenever problem arises, the IT support would be able to solve and provide solutions for teachers who are in need of help. It would show that teachers do not require much help in manoeuvring around the use of Gmail for example.

Chapter 7: Conclusion

Through the use of TPACK framework proposed by Mishra and Koehler (2006), it provided the focal area on understanding the relationship between technological pedagogical content knowledge. As mentioned by Mishra and Koehler, the development of TPACK framework ought to be a goal of teacher’s education. Understanding the relationship between technology, content and pedagogy can provide teachers with solutions on how an effective use of technology can be integrated into pedagogy and content knowledge. The TPACK framework provides a better understanding towards developing a better learning environment for teachers using Google Apps.

Firstly, this research shows that Google Apps supplements teachers as a technological aid to help them overcome administrative issues and act as a content management tool using Google sites. Administrative work such as booking computer laboratories and viewing calendar events can be made easier by the use of Google Calendar. Google Apps for Educators definitely provides a platform for teachers to integrate technology into their everyday use. On top of that, Google Mail (or Gmail) helps teachers to communicate with their peers and students more effectively. In addition, Google Documents allows teachers to work on different parts of the event and collaborate together as a whole.

However, social networking tools became more prominent as a collaboration tool in Singapore. Students and teachers would simply have to add each other’s contact, and communication between teachers, students, peers can take place. Users can easily comment on topics or issues that arise, and learning can take thereafter.

Secondly, Google Mail (Gmail), Google Calendar and Google Sites seemed to be the preferred choice of technology for teachers to use. Google Documents is fairly popular with teachers as well while Google Talk does not seem to be useful to teachers in Singapore. Since implementation of Google Apps for Educators is fairly new in schools, there may be some schools that have not adopted it as well. Teachers can now look at the preferred choices as proposed by this research. On top of that, this paper also provides teachers with ideas on how they could use Google Apps to help them better in providing different representations to students, communicating and collaborating with them.

7.1 Limitations of this research

With a small sample size of 10 teachers, it is relatively difficult to judge if the information can represent the entire population of teachers in schools. It was also relatively difficult to structure questions and to obtain the data to fit according to the TPACK framework. Extensive amount of research was done in understanding what this framework offers and what the main areas of focus are. In addition, further clarifications with the teachers are required should there be a vague answer that was difficult to understand. More focus could have been done towards understanding how students respond towards the use of Google Apps in schools. Similar to teachers understanding the rich connections between technology, pedagogy and content, students can also play a role in providing content and for teachers and other students. (Mishra and Koehler, 2006)

Future research can be considered towards the range of tertiary students and university students. It would be similar to the concept of integrating technology into the education environment.

7.2 Lessons learnt

This research paper provided me an understanding of relating a framework to the context of questionnaires. Understanding the relationship between them has taken me quite a fair bit of time. It was also difficult to ask teachers to help in filling up questionnaires, as they have many other work commitments as well. It would have been a better idea of providing them different options instead of putting a comment box in the questionnaire. It was only through the goodwill of these teachers that they provided me with detailed analysis for my research.