Group Assignment STA404 Group 4 PDF

Preview

Summary

COURSE : STA404 (STATISTIC FOR BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCETITLE : STUDENTS INTERACTION PATTERN IN DIFFERENT ONLINE LEARNING ACTIVITIESFACULTY : FACULTY OF ACCOUNTANCY PROGRAMME : BACHELOR OF ACCOUNTANY (HONS) LECTURER : MS RUMAIZAH BINTI HJ CHE MAT NOR DATE OF SUBMISSION : 31 st JANUARY 2021 GROUP M...

Description

COURSE : STA404 (STATISTIC FOR BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCE

TITLE : STUDENTS INTERACTION PATTERN IN DIFFERENT ONLINE LEARNING ACTIVITIES

FACULTY

:

FACULTY OF ACCOUNTANCY

PROGRAMME

:

BACHELOR OF ACCOUNTANY (HONS)

LECTURER

:

MS RUMAIZAH BINTI HJ CHE MAT NOR

DATE OF SUBMISSION GROUP MEMBER

:

31st JANUARY 2021

: NAME

REG.NO

SITI NOORNABILA BINTI POLI DAYANG SITI ZAHARAH BINTI ABANG SIDEK SITI NUR SOLEHA BINTI OSMAN

2020668412

KHAIRUNNISA BINTI HASBIE @ SEBIE

2017833364

2020255204 2020424316

1

TA TAB BLE O OFF CO CON NTEN TENTS TS TITLE

PAGE

CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION

3-5

1.1 Background of Study

3-4

1.2 Descriptive of Data

4-5

1.3 Objectives of Study

5

CHAPTER 2 : METHODOLOGY

6-8

2.1 Research Methodology

6

2.2 Method of Data Collection

6

2.3 Data Collection

6-7

2.4 Data Analysis

7-8

CHAPTER 3 : DATA ANALYSIS & FINDING

9-18

3.1 Descriptive Analysis

9-13

3.2 Objectives 2 : Learning Study Type/Method Preference

14-17

3.3 Objectives 3 : The Effectives of Learning Method

18

CHAPTER 4 : CONCLUSION

19

APPENDIX QUESTIONNAIRE

20-24

2

1.0

Introduction 1.1

Background of Study

Interaction and community building are essential elements of a well-functioning online learning environment, especially in learning environments based on investigative learning with a strong emphasis on teamwork. In this paper, practical solutions covering quality criteria for interaction in online education are presented for a simple implementation using standard generally available tools. The solutions are evaluated on the basis of student experiences reported in writing in response to a qualitative survey given to adult university business students. In student responses, the importance of an active online presence by instructors was emphasised, as well as the availability of team meeting platforms. Blogs were seen as an effective way to support learning. Face- to-face interaction, both between students and between students and instructors, was seen as less important than expected. A description of solutions for interaction in an online learning environment for adult business students in higher education will be given. The implementation is based on a learning model using investigative learning. The focus is on online solutions, although the implementation itself is a blended learning environment. Fitting studying with working and family life is often a struggle for adult students. Efficient and appropriate learning environments are therefore especially important in adult implementations. When students are expected to do a lot of group work and learn in a community, facilitating interaction is particularly essential. The solutions that work with adult students can, with some consideration, be applied to other student groups as well. However, the first three are most often used to evaluate learning interactions.

3

1. Learner-content interactions: This reveals how learners are using course material such as text, simulation, audio or video clips. 2. Learner-instructor interactions: This interaction shows how learners are approaching their instructor for subject matter queries. Moore (1989) recognized that these learner-instructor interactions are highly desirable for learners‟ academic success. In virtual mode, learner instructor interactions can be in the form of e-mail or discussion board. 3. Learner-learner interactions: According to Dewey (1996), learning can be considered as a social and interpretive activity in which learners collaboratively construct explanations and understandings of materials and phenomena within their environment. In distance mode, learner-learner interactions can be in the form of email, chat or discussion board. Online course management system is designed in such a way that some course tools can support more than one type of interaction (Miller, 2008). The following table reveals online course tools and their contribution to different types of learning interactions. 1.2

Descriptive of Data

Population

: 2753 active Student from UITM Samarahan Student.

Sample

: 111 Student from Random Faculty at UITM Samarahan.

Sampling Technique

: Using probability Sampling or systematic sampling consist by using pop-up surveys to be fill by random student.

Data Collection Method : The collection method from questionnaire form in terms google link provided.

4

Table 1: Description of variables

Section A

Name of the questionnaire from data Demographic

Description of Section

Item

Types of Variable

Measurement scale

Age

Question 1

Quantitative

Ration

Gender

Question 2

Qualitative

Nominal

Marital Status

Question 3

Qualitative

Nominal

Student status

Question 4

Qualitative

Nominal

Race

Question 5

Qualitative

Nominal

B

Demographic

Prefer Learning type

Question 6 until 11

Qualitative

Nominal

C

Demographic

The Effectiveness Of Learning Method

Question 12-16

Quantitative

Ration

1.3

Objectives of Study

The objective of the study are :  to analyze the types of learning resources preferred ; and  to identify which learning type is more preferable and effective among students ; and  to investigate learners’ interaction with peers and teachers based on the dimensions of interaction, depth of discussions and categories of exchanges in the online forums.

5

2.0

Methodology

2.1 Research Methodology The research methodology for this study was to review research on students interaction pattern in different online learning. For purposes of this study, online education is operationally defined as a format used in learning when learners do not need to be in classrooms moreover our country is facing the problem of covid-19. In this research, the method that we used is quantitative data and qualitative data. For quantitative data, we will collect the data based on their age. Next, in order to classified the specific categories, we also use qualitative data whereby it is easier to conducting group such as, which learning type are more effectiveness among students. The study was carried out with 111 Student from Random Faculty at UITM Samarahan. 2.2 Method of Data Collection

The method of data collection used in this study is online survey or online questionnaire. We asked the students in UiTM which are from the selected programme to fill the online survey. We spread the link of the questionnaire through medias like Whatsapp.

2.3 Data Collection

Section A (Demographic)

Item

Variable

Types of Variable

Measurement scale

Method analysis

Question 1

Age

Quantitative

Ration

Bar Chart Frequency Distribution

Question 2

Gender

Qualitative

Nominal

Bar Chart Frequency Distribution

Question 3

Marital Status

Qualitative

Nominal

Bar Chart Frequency Distribution

Question 4

Student status

Qualitative

Nominal

Bar Chart Frequency Distribution 6

Bar Chart Frequency Distribution Question 5

Race

B (Prefer Learning Prefer Learning B6 until B11 type) type C (The Effectiveness Of Learning Method)

C12-C16

The Effectiveness Of Learning Method

Qualitative

Nominal

Bar Chart Frequency Distribution

Qualitative

Nominal

Bar Chart Frequency Distribution & Pie chart

Quantitative

Ration

Variable Chart Bar

Table above summarized all the variables used in this study.

2.4 Data Analysis During our initial literature review, we started to notice trends arising from online education. We categorized the themes adhering to the theoretical framework developed by Garrison and his colleagues, which emphasizes social presence, teaching presence, and cognitive presence in online teaching and learning (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000). Ultimately, we organized the findings into three major themes to answer our research questions, which included the learning resources preferred, which learning type are more effectiveness among students and learners’ interaction with peers and teachers. The qualitative content analysis approach (Cavanagh, 1997) was thus employed for the data analysis.

Objectives

To analyse the types of learning resources preferred

Variable

Method of Analysis

Learning resources preferred Any relevant graph and/or summary statistics

To identify which learning type is Learning type more preferable and effective among students

Any relevant graph and/or summary statistics

7

To investigate learners’ interaction with peers and teachers based on the dimensions of interaction, depth of discussions and categories of exchanges in the online forums.

Learners’ interaction

Any relevant graph and/or summary statistics

8

3.0 ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS 3.1 Descriptive Analysis

3.1.1 Respondent’s Gender Table 1 and Figure 1 indicates the percentage of male dan female students who participated in the study. Findings revealed that female respondents was higher than male respondents. There were 74 female respondents which comprised 66.7% of the whole sample where are only 37 respondents were male, which made up of 33.3% from 111 samples.

Table 1 : Distribution of Gender Gender

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Male

37

33.3

Female

74

66.7

Total

111

100

80

66.7% 74

70

Frequency

60 50 40

33.3% 37

30 20 10 0 Male

Female

Axis Title Gender

Figure 1 : Bar Chart of respondent’s gender

9

3.1.2 Respondent Age 50 45

Frequency

40 35 30 25

45% 45

20

29.7% 33

15 10 5

14.4% 16

10.8% 12

0 19-20

21-23

24-25

26 above

Age Figure 2:Bar chart of respondent age Age

Frequency

Percentage (%)

19-20

16

14.4

21-23

12

10.8

24-25

33

29.7

26 above

50

45

Total

111

100

Table 2: Frequency distribution of respondent’s age Figure 2 and table 2 shows the frequency distribution respondent’s age of this study. 45% of the respondent’s age is 26 and above. This respondent’s consist of 50 respondent in total. While 29.7% of the respondent’s age is between 24-25 and comprises of 33 respondents. Meanwhile, 14.4% of the respondents age are between 21-23 which comprises 12 respondents. However, 10.8% of the respondents age are between 19-20 which comprises 12 respondents. 10

3.1.3 Respondent’s Marital Status

90 80

Frequency

70 60 50 40

77.5% 86

30 20

22.5% 25

10 0

Single

Married

Status Figure 3:Bar chart of respondent marital status Marital status

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Single

86

77.5

Married

25

22.5

Total

111

100

Table 3: Frequency distribution of respondent’s marital status Figure 3 and Table 3 shows the frequency distribution of respondent’s marital status. 77.5% of the respondents which consist of 86 respondents are single while 22.5% of the respondents are married. This consist of 25 respondents out of 111.

11

3.1.4 Respondent’s Study Status 80 70 60 50

Frequency

40

66.7% 74

30 20 10

33.3% 37

0 Full time student

Part time student

Full time student

Part time student

Figure 4:Bar chart of respondent study status Respondents study status

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Full time student

37

33.3

Part time student

74

66.7

Total

111

100

Table 4: Frequency distribution of respondent’s study status Figure 4 and table 4 shows the frequency distribution of respondents study status. What means here is, this research sample are UiTM students and figure 4 and table 4 shows the whether the research sample is attending full time study or part time study. Therefore, 33.3% respondents are full time which consist of 37 respondents. While 66.7% of the respondents are part time study, which are accounted at 74 respondents.

12

3.1.5 Respondent’s Race 90

79.3% 88

80 70 60

Frequency

50 40 30 20 3.6% 4

10

8.1% 9

9% 10

Iban

Others

0 Malay

Bidayuh

Respondent's Race Figure 5 : Bar chart of respondents race Race

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Malay

88

79.3

Bidayuh

4

3.6

Iban

9

8.1

Others

10

9

Total

111

100

Table 5: Frequency distribution of respondent’s race Figure 5 and table 5 shows the frequency distribution of respondents race. 79.3% of the respondents which represents 88 respondents are Malay, while 9% of the respondents which represents 10 respondents are Iban. Next is followed by others which are 9% and represent 10 respondents. The rest is Bidayuh which are 3.6% and represent 4 respondents.

13

3.2

Objective 2: Learning Study Type/Method Preference

3.2.1 Respondent’s Duration Attending Online class Duration

Frequency

76.6% 85

18% 20 Below 1 year

1-2 years

0.9% 1

4.5% 5

3-4 years

5 years above

Figure 6:Bar chart of respondents duration attending online class

Duration

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Below 1 year 1-2 years

85 20

76.6 18

3-4 years

1

0.9

5 years and above

5

4.5

Total

111

100

Table 6: Frequency distribution of respondent’s duration attending online class From our research, 100% repondents answering our survey have experience attending part time study. Therefore, from figure 5 and table 6, there are 76.6% respondents has attend online class for below 1 year. This followed by 18% which represents 20 respondents has already attend online class for 1-2 years. Next is 4.5% which represents 5 respondents have experience attending online study for 5 years and above. While the rest is only 0.9% which

14

represent 1 of the respondent which only have experience in attending online study for 3-4 years.

The most preferrable learning method 7.2% 8

92.8% 103

Face to face class

Online classes

Pie chart 1: The most preferable learning method

Reason for having online classes Pandemic 18% 20 0, 0% 8.1% 9

Distance

73.9% 82

Everyone is agree to have the onlineclass instead of face to face All of the above

Pie chart 2: The reason for having online classes

15

Recommendation to family and friends

3.6% 4 36.9% 41

Face to face classes Both, depend on the situation Online classes

59.5% 66

Pie chart 3: Recommendation to families and friend

Obstacles to attend online classes 18.9% 21 6.3% 7 65.8% 73

4.5% 5

4.5% 5

Unstable network Lecturer is unaware to student's problem about the subject Device lag Environment

Pie chart 4: Obstacles to attend online classes Pie chart 1 shows the most preferable learning method. From there, we can conclude that 92.8% of the respondents prefer face to face classes rather than online classes. While for pie chart 2 which shows the reasons for having online classes. 73.9% which represents 82 respondents attend online classes due to pandemic. While 18% which

16

represents 20 respondents choose all of the above, which is pandemic, distance, everyone is agree to have online classes instead of face to face class. And 8.1% which represents 9 respondents attend online classes due to distance. For pie chart 3 which shows the suggestion that we would choose to our families and friends, 59.5% which represent 66 respondents would suggest both learning method, depending on the situation. While another 36.9% which represent 41 respondent choose to have face to face classes and the balance which is 3.6% which accounted 4 respondent choose to suggest online classes to their families and friends. For pie chart 4 which shows the obstacle to attend online classes, 65.8% which represent 73 respondent answer all of the above (unstable network, lecturer is unaware of student’s problem about the subject, device lag and environment). This is the majority answer. However, 18.9% which consist of of 21 respondents choose unstable network. 6.3% which represent 7 respondents choose lecturer is unaware to students problem about the subject. While the other which is device lag and environment record 4.5% which consist of 5 respondent respectively.

17

3.3

Objective 3: The Effectiveness Of Learning Method

9.9 13.5

COMMUNICATON DURING ONLINE CLASSES

8.1 10.8

LEVEL OF DIFFICULTIES WHEN ATTENDING ONLINE CLASSES

23.4 19.8

8.1 13.5 11.7

LEVEL OF FOCUS WHEN ATTENDING ONLINE CLASSES

4

22.5

45.9

13.5 9.9 0

5

63.1

26.1

9 1.8 0 8.1

ONLINE LEARNING EXPERIENCE

37.8

36.9 30.6

7.2 FACE TO FACE LEARNING EXPERIENCE