Abstract:

In recent years, in the Applied Physics Department of the School of Design Engineering (ETSID) of the Universitat Politècnica de València, we have included, as a significant activity for Physics subjects, the collaborative teamwork. Through this activity we pretend to enhance the specific skills that should be acquired coursing the subject. Moreover, this way of working opens the possibility of developing generic skills, such as improving the ability to listen/discuss, improving written and oral communication, etc. So,due to its educational potential, we think that it is relevant to deepen this activity.

An important starting point in this task is to know about the perception that students have of collaborative work. So we have done a survey to a group of about 150 students in the subject of Physics in three different degrees (Degree in Electronic Engineering and Automation, Degree in Aerospace Engineering, Degree in Design and Product Development) expressing their opinion on the method used in the field of collaborative work, advantages and disadvantages of it, about the activity and their assessment, and the role of teachers.

In this study we show the results obtained by reviewing the survey through factoring techniques, using a principal component analysis, with exploratory purpose. The survey consisted of 15 questions along the lines of Likert test, with 5 response options. Additionally, there was an open question that has not been included in the analysis. The responses have been subjected to the Bartlett sphericity test, whose null hypothesis is that there is no correlation between the variables, and to the test of Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO), based on the comparison of the Pearson coefficients between variables. The resultshave shown the suitability of the factoring analysis to this set of variables.

A first insight into the problem and analysis results has led us to consider that the appropriate number of extracted factors is in the range between three and five. The extraction of five factors brings up two constructs, respectively linked to one specific item (personal dedication to the activity/use of electronic tools). The remaining three factors (personal perception of the performance/evaluation of the activity/teacher assistance) are associated with the twelveremaining variables/questions. The total variance explained by the five factors was 79%, showing a very stable set of factors. The analysis allows us to build a tool to monitor the activity of collaborative teamwork, essential to analyse, diagnose and improve its performance.

Keywords:

Collaborative teamwork, student’s satisfaction.