| Literature DB >> 35769744 |
Abstract
With the learning characteristics of adults, such as self-directed learning, courses that are preferred in application and practice, this research explores the Problem-Based Learning (PBL) teaching method employed in adult keyboard music learning courses. This research established a research model and investigated the correlation of learning satisfaction with influencing factors such as teaching effectiveness, self-efficacy, and teamwork and verified teaching effectiveness, self-efficacy, and teamwork relationships. Research data has been collected from the keyboard music students of the two classes of the Arts & Culture Department in Open University of Kaohsiung (OUK). Data analysis was conducted in three stages: descriptive statistics, measurement model verification, and structural equation model. The results of the study found that teaching effectiveness has a significant impact on learning satisfaction. Teamwork also has a significant positive impact on learning satisfaction. However, the self-efficacy dimension has little effect on learning satisfaction. Finally, the results of the study found that teaching effectiveness and teamwork both have significant impacts on learning satisfaction. However, the self-efficacy dimension has little effect on learning satisfaction. The student-led presentations went smoothly and the results were quite remarkable, which became a reference for the implementation of other courses for adults in the future.Entities:
Keywords: PBL teaching model; adult learning; keyboard music; self-efficacy; teaching effectiveness; teamwork
Year: 2022 PMID: 35769744 PMCID: PMC9234569 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.884311
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Figure 1Keyboard music learning course design.
Operational definitions of research variables.
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
| Learning | For me, taking lessons in keyboard music | Kannan and |
| Teaching | The keyboard music course materials were | Gibbons et al., |
| Self- | When I play the keyboard by myself, I feel | Baruch and Lin, |
| Team | During the keyboarding course, our team | Huang et al., |
| Team EQ | During the keyboarding course, members of | Huang et al., |
| Team | During the keyboarding course, our team | Fornell and |
Figure 2Research model.
Summary table of descriptive statistics.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Female | 24 | 70.6 |
| Male | 10 | 29.4 | |
| Age | Under 30 years old | 7 | 20.6 |
| 31–50 years old | 10 | 29.4 | |
| 51–70 years old | 13 | 38.2 | |
| 71 years old or above | 4 | 11.8 | |
| Marital status | Married | 22 | 64.7 |
| Unmarried | 12 | 35.3 | |
| Education | High school or under | 8 | 64.7 |
| College/University | 22 | 11.8 | |
| Master or above | 4 | 23.5 | |
| Occupation | Office worker | 7 | 20.6 |
| Freelance | 6 | 17.6 | |
| Military, public and educational personnel | 6 | 17.6 | |
| Housewife | 2 | 5.8 | |
| Retire | 3 | 8.8 | |
| Student | 5 | 14.7 | |
| Other | 5 | 14.7 |
Item average and standard deviation analysis table.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Learning satisfaction | 1. Keyboard music learning courses give me confidence | 6.324 | 1.065 |
| 2. I strongly recommend others to take keyboard learning courses | 6.588 | 0.857 | |
| 3. I think I made the right decision to take the keyboard music learning course | 6.706 | 0.676 | |
| 4. The keyboard music learning course is a very pleasant experience for me | 6.706 | 0.719 | |
| 5. Overall, I am satisfied with the keyboard music learning course | 6.647 | 0.734 | |
| Teaching effectiveness | 1. The course materials are very organized | 6.588 | 0.857 |
| 2. The teacher gave a lot of examples and guidance | 6.794 | 0.538 | |
| 3. Teachers use innovative teaching methods | 6.706 | 0.719 | |
| 4. The teacher explained clearly | 6.647 | 0.849 | |
| 5. The teacher makes the class fun | 6.765 | 0.699 | |
| 6. The teacher is very enthusiastic in teaching | 6.912 | 0.379 | |
| Self-efficacy | 1. When I play on my own, I feel comfortable | 6.559 | 0.824 |
| 2. I still feel at ease when others are not there to tell me how to play | 6.647 | 0.774 | |
| 3. I can follow the instructions to complete most of the playing | 6.441 | 0.860 | |
| 4. I can play easily | 6.235 | 1.046 | |
| 5. I can mostly play the song by myself | 6.059 | 1.278 | |
| Team Competence | 1. Our team members are in the same boat | 6.853 | 0.436 |
| 2. Our team requires inclusiveness and our team gets along with each other | 6.824 | 0.521 | |
| 3. Our team gets along well | 6.882 | 0.409 | |
| 4. Our planning and allocation are better than other teams | 6.559 | 0.746 | |
| 5. The quality of our team's work is better than other teams | 6.382 | 1.015 | |
| 6. The amount of work of our team is satisfactory | 6.559 | 0.860 | |
| Team EQ | 1. Our teams have a full understanding of each other's emotions | 6.500 | 0.826 |
| 2. Our team members can judge emotions from each other's behavior | 6.441 | 0.860 | |
| 3. Our team will encourage each other and believe in our own abilities | 6.559 | 0.746 | |
| 4. Our team members have the ability to control their emotions | 6.618 | 0.779 | |
| 5. Our team works together to achieve the goal | 6.529 | 0.706 | |
| 6. Our team has the ability to be self-aware | 6.618 | 0.551 | |
| Team interaction | 1. Our team helps each other and solves difficulties together | 6.647 | 0.734 |
| 2. Our team will listen to each other | 6.676 | 0.684 | |
| 3. Our team showed enthusiasm in the conversation | 6.559 | 0.746 | |
| 4. I feel teamwork when playing keyboard ensemble | 6.500 | 0.864 | |
| 5. Mutual cooperation in keyboard ensemble helps to learn | 6.647 | 0.734 | |
| 6. The keyboard ensemble helps to promote the social interaction of the team | 6.647 | 0.734 |
Reliability and validity of facets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Team Competence (TC) | TC1 | 0.940 | 0.958 | 0.966 | 0.828 |
| TC2 | 0.924 | ||||
| TC3 | 0.920 | ||||
| TC4 | 0.887 | ||||
| TC5 | 0.863 | ||||
| TC6 | 0.922 | ||||
| Team EQ (EQ) | EQ1 | 0.902 | 0.959 | 0.967 | 0.829 |
| EQ2 | 0.933 | ||||
| EQ3 | 0.931 | ||||
| EQ4 | 0.879 | ||||
| EQ5 | 0.948 | ||||
| EQ6 | 0.868 | ||||
| Team Interaction (TI) | TI1 | 0.936 | 0.946 | 0.957 | 0.789 |
| TI2 | 0.880 | ||||
| TI3 | 0.787 | ||||
| TI4 | 0.867 | ||||
| TI5 | 0.921 | ||||
| TI6 | 0.931 | ||||
| Teaching Effectiveness (TE) | TE1 | 0.952 | 0.960 | 0.969 | 0.8838 |
| TE2 | 0.930 | ||||
| TE3 | 0.965 | ||||
| TE4 | 0.931 | ||||
| TE5 | 0.727 | ||||
| TE6 | 0.930 | ||||
| Self-efficacy (SE) | SE1 | 0.936 | 0.905 | 0.929 | 0.725 |
| SE2 | 0.797 | ||||
| SE3 | 0.776 | ||||
| SE4 | 0.906 | ||||
| SE5 | 0.832 | ||||
| SE2 | 0.797 | ||||
| Learning Satisfaction (LS) | LS1 | 0.805 | 0.947 | 0.960 | 0.827 |
| LS2 | 0.944 | ||||
| LS3 | 0.912 | ||||
| LS4 | 0.936 | ||||
| LS5 | 0.943 | ||||
| LS2 | 0.944 | ||||
| Team work(TW) | TC | 0.923 | 0.972 | 0.974 | 0.678 |
| TE | 0.905 | ||||
| TI | 0.909 |
Standardized factor loadings and cross loadings of the outer model.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EQ1 |
| 0.551 | 0.309 | 0.709 | 0.509 | 0.628 | 0.816 |
| EQ2 |
| 0.510 | 0.325 | 0.661 | 0.459 | 0.649 | 0.815 |
| EQ3 |
| 0.628 | 0.469 | 0.744 | 0.463 | 0.733 | 0.878 |
| EQ4 |
| 0.585 | 0.359 | 0.699 | 0.487 | 0.759 | 0.850 |
| EQ5 |
| 0.474 | 0.385 | 0.665 | 0.311 | 0.679 | 0.833 |
| EQ6 |
| 0.409 | 0.359 | 0.600 | 0.262 | 0.580 | 0.744 |
| LS1 | 0.544 |
| 0.559 | 0.636 | 0.532 | 0.518 | 0.623 |
| LS2 | 0.541 |
| 0.616 | 0.805 | 0.809 | 0.492 | 0.681 |
| LS3 | 0.595 |
| 0.653 | 0.795 | 0.860 | 0.515 | 0.703 |
| LS4 | 0.512 |
| 0.633 | 0.789 | 0.674 | 0.546 | 0.684 |
| LS5 | 0.464 |
| 0.795 | 0.754 | 0.869 | 0.591 | 0.668 |
| SE1 | 0.423 | 0.738 |
| 0.545 | 0.821 | 0.572 | 0.565 |
| SE2 | 0.369 | 0.676 |
| 0.507 | 0.802 | 0.363 | 0.458 |
| SE3 | 0.308 | 0.478 |
| 0.276 | 0.412 | 0.202 | 0.290 |
| SE4 | 0.340 | 0.590 |
| 0.389 | 0.547 | 0.558 | 0.469 |
| SE5 | 0.252 | 0.525 |
| 0.354 | 0.476 | 0.446 | 0.385 |
| TC1 | 0.652 | 0.737 | 0.420 |
| 0.717 | 0.660 | 0.830 |
| TC2 | 0.633 | 0.785 | 0.407 |
| 0.740 | 0.651 | 0.814 |
| TC3 | 0.651 | 0.709 | 0.406 |
| 0.639 | 0.708 | 0.839 |
| TC4 | 0.727 | 0.811 | 0.482 |
| 0.534 | 0.655 | 0.835 |
| TC5 | 0.659 | 0.679 | 0.413 |
| 0.491 | 0.604 | 0.783 |
| TC6 | 0.754 | 0.821 | 0.599 |
| 0.613 | 0.847 | 0.926 |
| TE1 | 0.483 | 0.824 | 0.678 | 0.707 |
| 0.528 | 0.633 |
| TE2 | 0.420 | 0.768 | 0.752 | 0.592 |
| 0.360 | 0.508 |
| TE3 | 0.412 | 0.817 | 0.709 | 0.631 |
| 0.515 | 0.574 |
| TE4 | 0.536 | 0.852 | 0.655 | 0.741 |
| 0.467 | 0.644 |
| TE5 | 0.441 | 0.778 | 0.663 | 0.709 |
| 0.440 | 0.589 |
| TE6 | 0.129 | 0.476 | 0.686 | 0.263 |
| 0.168 | 0.208 |
| TI1 | 0.719 | 0.502 | 0.497 | 0.691 | 0.433 |
| 0.853 |
| TI2 | 0.649 | 0.341 | 0.321 | 0.495 | 0.297 |
| 0.729 |
| TI3 | 0.686 | 0.288 | 0.260 | 0.485 | 0.271 |
| 0.705 |
| TI4 | 0.695 | 0.528 | 0.523 | 0.696 | 0.295 |
| 0.823 |
| TI5 | 0.578 | 0.664 | 0.535 | 0.782 | 0.531 |
| 0.834 |
| TI6 | 0.630 | 0.728 | 0.587 | 0.847 | 0.617 |
| 0.881 |
EQ, Team EQ; LS, Learning Satisfaction; SE, Self-efficacy; TC, Team Competence; TE, Teaching Effectiveness; TI, Team Interaction. The bold values indicate the highest standardized factor loadings.
Path coefficients.
|
|
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1: TE → LS | 0.510 | 0.246 | 2.071 | 0.039 | 0.003 | 0.909 |
| H2: SE → | 0.155 | 0.242 | 0.640 | 0.522 | −0.148 | 0.762 |
| H3: Team | 0.354 | 0.168 | 2.110 | 0.035 | −0.050 | 0.554 |
| H4: Team | 0.524 | 0.188 | 2.787 | 0.006 | 0.155 | 0.863 |
LS, Learning Satisfaction; SE, Self-efficacy; TE, Teaching Effectiveness.
Figure 3PLS statistical model diagram. LS, Learning Satisfaction; SE, Self efficacy; TE, Teaching; TW, Team Work.