1 / 32

Topic

Topic. Is there negative perception of undergraduates towards group work?. Group members : Oh Shu Xuan A123581 Sharafuddin A126406 Yu Xuan A122848 Nurul Atiqah Mt. Zin A124331 Hafizah Mohd. Azraai A118978 Helene Loke Xing Lin A123161 Lee Loong Yee A124044

akiva
Télécharger la présentation

Topic

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Topic Is there negative perception of undergraduates towards group work? Group members : Oh Shu Xuan A123581 Sharafuddin A126406 Yu Xuan A122848 Nurul Atiqah Mt. Zin A124331 Hafizah Mohd. Azraai A118978 Helene Loke Xing Lin A123161 Lee Loong Yee A124044 Lee Pei Teng A118692

  2. General Objective To study the undergraduates' perception towards group work in Applied Biostatistics course (NNNA3063)

  3. Specific Objective • To identify the presence of negative perception towards group work in Applied Biostatistics course (NNNA3063) among undergraduates from Audiology and Speech Sciences Department(JASP) and its underlying factors. • To compare the perception towards group work in Applied Biostatistics course (NNNA3063) between JASP undergraduates from academic session 2009/2010 and those from academic session 2010/2011. • To determine the relationship between JASP undergraduates’ perception towards group work in Applied Biostatistics course (NNNA3063) and their preference towards group work in the future.

  4. Research Question • Is negative perception towards group work in Applied Biostatistics course present among undergraduates from JASP and what are the underlying factors? • Is there a significant difference in the perception towards group work in Applied Biostatistics course (NNNA3063) between JASP undergraduates from academic session 2009/2010 and those from academic session 2010/2011? • How is the JASP undergraduates’ perception towards group work in Applied Biostatistics course (NNNA3063) related to their preference towards group work in the future?

  5. Hypothesis • There is a significant difference in the perception towards group work in Applied Biostatistics course (NNNA3063) between undergraduates from academic session 2009/2010 and those from academic session 2010/2011.  • There is no relationship between the JASP undergraduates’ perception towards group work in Applied Biostatistics course (NNNA3063) and their preference towards group work in the future.

  6. Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria • Third and fourth year Audiology and Speech Sciences students. • Took NNNA3063 Applied Biostatistics during Semester 1 in sessions 2009/2010 or 2010/2011. • Participated in research group work under this subject with at least six other members in the group • Participated in research group work with a mixture of native languages in the group • Researchers of the study

  7. Design study • Survey • Quantitative research Instrument • Questionnaire

  8. Target Population • UKM FSKB Audiology and Speech Sciences undergraduates who had undergone Applied Biostatistics (NNNA 3063) course in academic sessions 2009/2010 and 2010/2011.

  9. Sampling method • Convenient sampling • The participants are selected, in part or in whole, at the convenience of the researcher

  10. Sampling frame & sample unit • Sampling frame: a list of 3rd year and 4th year JASP students who had undergone Research Methodology course in 2009/2010(4th year),2010/2011(3rd year) • Sample unit: an Audiology or Speech Sciences student who had undergone Research Methodology course in 2009/2010 or 2010/2011

  11. Sample size Formula for selected population n = x2NP(1-P) 2(N-1) + x2P(1-P) = 3.84 (50) 0.5 (1-0.5) 0.052 (50-1) + 3.84 (0.5)(1-0.5) = 44.34 = 44 students n = sample size N = known population (number of 3rd yr+4th JASP students)

  12. Data Analysis and Interpretation

  13. N=44

  14. N=44

  15. N=44

  16. N=44

  17. N=44

  18. Overall Mean Score For Motivational, Interaction and Logistical Difficulties • 1= Totally disagree • 2= Disagree • 3= Neutral • 4= Agree • 5= Totally agree • In general, participants do not agree that motivational, interaction and logistical difficulties occur in the group work of Applied Biostatistics

  19. Significant Individual Modes For Specific Difficulties • 1= Totally disagree; 2= Disagree; 3= Neutral; 4= Agree; 5= Totally agree

  20. Difference of Perception between Undergraduates from Academic Session 2009/2010 and 2010/2011 • F(3,36)=3.241, p=0.033, partial η2 =0.213 • There was a significant effect of the academic session variable (Academic Session 2009/2010 and 2010/2011) on the combined dependent variables (motivational, interaction and logistical difficulties)

  21. Difference of Perception between Undergraduates from Academic Session 2009/2010 and 2010/2011 • Analysis of the dependent variables individually showed no difference in perception between academic sessions for the interaction and logistical difficulties . • Motivational difficulties was statistically significant at a Bonferroni adjusted alpha level of 0.017, F(1,38)=9.20, p=0.004. partial η2=0.195 • Undergraduates from academic session 2009/2010 rated more negatively (i.e higher agreement) towards motivational difficulties than those from academic session 2010/2011.

  22. Correlation between Satisfaction Level Towards Group Work in Applied Biostatistics and Preference Towards Group Work in The Future • r(42)= 0.053, p= 0.732 • The correlation was statistically not significant. • Participants do not associate their satisfaction level towards group work in Applied Biostatistics and their preference towards group work in the future.

  23. Discussion

  24. Interaction Difficulties Which Contributes to Negative Perception Towards Group Work Q1: Arguments happened in the group Reasons: a. Presence of many people in a group with varying opinions b. Difficulties in accepting other people’s opinions Q7: Fractions (members naturally grouped themselves into smaller groups) developed in the group Reasons: a. People with similar opinions and preferences is more likely to group themselves together b. Presence of cultural differences amongst group members, more affinity towards similar culture

  25. Logiatical Difficulties Which Contributes to Negative Perception Towards Group Work Q2: Difficult to find an appropriate time for group meeting Reasons: a. Varying timetables between group members, hard to allocate most suitable time to meet b. Presence of other influential external factors (place, transport) Q7: Non-punctual members delayed the work progress Reasons: a. Lesser time to discuss and unconditionally will lengthen the meetings session

  26. Q8: Group problems seemed to arise as deadline approaches a. There are other assignment/commitment need to be taken into consideration and to be prioritize first b. Different time management between group members Q9: Difficult to coordinate a group more than two members a. Organization of group not determined b. Difficult to contact some group members at a certain time c. Difficult to find suitable place to meet where all group members can sit comfortably and discuss

  27. Improving The Quality of Group Work in Applied Biostatistics Course • Student need a longer duration to complete the task. • Cooperation/commitment from the group members is important- e.g. punctuality. • Lack of guidance/ experience in planning of the group work. • Prefer smaller group to reduce problems occured. • Preference in member selection and the topic influenced individual performance in the group.

  28. Limitations of study • small sample size • Is not representative of the whole population who had undergone Applied Biostatistics Course because the study only involved JASP undergraduates • carryover effect • group work projects other than Applied Biostatistics project • recurrence of difficulties cause more impacts on the respondent

  29. Suggestions for future study • To explore the impact of technological innovations, such as wikis and other online collaboration tools, on the group work process. • To identify the relationship between the amount of support and structure given to students by instructors for a group work assignment and a student’s perception, believed importance, and confidence in group work skills.

  30. Conclusion • There is no negative perception towards group work in Applied Biostatistics course in general. • There is a significant difference in the perception towards group work in Applied Biostatistics course (NNNA3063) between undergraduates from academic session 2009/2010 and those from academic session 2010/2011.  • There is no relationship between the JASP undergraduates’ perception towards group work in Applied Biostatistics course (NNNA3063) and their preference towards group work in the future.

More Related