Table 4 Findings by Assessment Type of Project Team Products.

From: Design, implementation, and evaluation of an online instructional process to enhance teachers’ design thinking skills

Assessment Type

Material (Team)

 

Scope Adequacy

Scientificness

Organizing

Originality

Self

Team 1

Mead (SD)

2.93 (0.08)

2.89 (0.25)

2.89 (0.12)

2.72 (0.52)

Median (Min-Max)

2.91 (2.82–3)

3 (2.44–3)

2.91 (2.73–3)

3 (1.8–3)

Team 2

Mead (SD)

2.65 (0.42)

2.56 (0.57)

2.65 (0.47)

2.36 (0.77)

Median (Min-Mak)

2.82 (1.91–2.91)

2.78 (1.67–3)

2.91 (1.91–3)

2.6 (1.2–3)

Team 3

Mead (SD)

2.67 (0.38)

2.56 (0.53)

2.65 (0.41)

2.52 (0.76)

Median (Min-Max)

2.82 (2.18–3)

2.67 (1.67–3)

2.64 (2–3)

2.8 (1.2–3)

Team 4

Mead (SD)

2.73 (0.27)

2.69 (0.37)

2.56 (0.52)

2.4 (1.04)

Median (Min-Max)

2.82 (2.36–3)

2.78 (2.11–3)

2.82 (2–3)

3 (0.6–3)

Team 5

Mead (SD)

2.55 (0.49)

2.92 (0.17)

2.77 (0.22)

2.3 (0.35)

Median (Min-Max)

2.59 (2–3)

3 (2.67–3)

2.77 (2.55–3)

2.2 (2–2.8)

Team 6

Mead (SD)

2.75 (0.39)

2.75 (0.5)

2.73 (0.55)

2.65 (0.7)

Median (Min-Max)

2.91 (2.18–3)

3 (2–3)

3 (1.91–3)

3 (1.6–3)

Test Statistics

2.966

4.409

1.294

3.113

pa

0.705

0.492

0.936

0.683

Peer

Team 1

Mead (SD)

2.58 (0.38)

2.65 (0.45)

2.67 (0.39)

2.42 (0.49)

Median (Min-Max)

2.73 (2–3)

2.78 (1.22–3)

2.73 (1.64–3)

2.4 (1.2–3)

Team 2

Mead (SD)

2.38 (0.51)

2.5 (0.56)

2.48 (0.45)

2.14 (0.52)

Median (Min-Max)

2.45 (1.09–3)

2.67 (1.11–3)

2.55 (1.36–3)

2 (1.2–3)

Team 3

Mead (SD)

2.29 (0.64)

2.49 (0.51)

2.36 (0.57)

2.04 (0.74)

Median (Min-Max)

2.55 (0.73–3)

2.67 (1.44–3)

2.45 (1.18–3)

2 (0.6–3)

Team 4

Mead (SD)

2.35 (0.54)

2.41 (0.5)

2.49 (0.49)

2.17 (0.53)

Median (Min-Max)

2.36 (0.91–3)

2.33 (1.44–3)

2.64 (1.27–3)

2 (1.2–3)

Team 5

Mead (SD)

2.19 (0.73)

2.17 (0.69)

2.26 (0.58)

2 (0.69)

Median (Min-Max)

2.23 (0.18–3)

2.33 (0.89–3)

2.36 (1.27–3)

2 (0.8–3)

Team 6

Mead (SD)

2.25 (0.62)

2.05 (0.82)

2.35 (0.53)

2.04 (0.71)

Median (Min-Max)

2.41 (0.36–3)

2.17 (0–3)

2.45 (0.73–3)

2 (0–3)

Test Statistics

5.665

11.911

9.09

6.064

pa

0.34

0.036*

0.106

0.3

Instructor

Team 1

Mead (SD)

2.76 (0.19)

2 (0.22)

2.52 (0.19)

2.33 (0.31)

Median (Min-Max)

2.82 (2.55–2.91)

2 (1.78–2.22)

2.45 (2.36–2.73)

2.4 (2–2.6)

Team 2

Mead (SD)

2.45 (0)

1.78 (0.19)

2.18 (0.09)

2.13 (0.12)

Median (Min-Max)

2.45 (2.45–2.45)

1.67 (1.67–2)

2.18 (2.09–2.27)

2.2 (2–2.2)

Team 3

Mead (SD)

2.64 (0.18)

1.26 (0.17)

2.18 (0.27)

2.2 (0.2)

Median (Min-Max)

2.64 (2.45–2.82)

1.22 (1.11–1.44)

2.18 (1.91–2.45)

2.2 (2–2.4)

Team 4

Mead (SD)

2.82 (0.09)

1.81 (0.13)

2.67 (0.19)

2.8 (0.35)

Median (Min-Max)

2.82 (2.73–2.91)

1.89 (1.67–1.89)

2.73 (2.45–2.82)

3 (2.4–3)

Team 5

Mead (SD)

2.45 (0.16)

1.81 (0.13)

2.15 (0.23)

2.13 (0.31)

Median (Min-Max)

2.36 (2.36–2.64)

1.89 (1.67–1.89)

2.18 (1.91–2.36)

2.2 (1.8–2.4)

Team 6

Mead (SD)

2.67 (0.05)

1.04 (0.06)

2.27 (0.24)

2.27 (0.23)

Median (Min-Max)

2.64 (2.64–2.73)

1 (1–1.11)

2.36 (2–2.45)

2.4 (2–2.4)

Test Statistics

10.63

18.082

9.602

6.883

pa

0.059

0.023*

0.087

0.229

  1. aKruskal Wallis, *Significant at the <0.05 level.
Back to article page