Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Norwegian Open Resea...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
versions View all 1 versions
addClaim

The personal in the professional: A Q-methodological study of the students’ subjective experience of how Experts in Teamwork facilitates the development of personal competence

Authors: Dahl, Lene Røsok;

The personal in the professional: A Q-methodological study of the students’ subjective experience of how Experts in Teamwork facilitates the development of personal competence

Abstract

The purpose of this study has been to explore students’ subjective experience of learning and development in Experts in Teamwork (EiT), with a focus on personal competence. The basis for the study has been the question of research; How do students experience Experts in Teamwork facilitating the development of personal competence? This research is a Q-methodological study, where 36 participants have conducted a Q-sort. This means that they did a sort of 36 statements on an array from most agree (+5) to most disagree (-5), in a qu asi-normal distribution form. The statements were obtained from a research design based on Fisher ’s balanced block design. The participants Q-sorts were the basis for the factor analysis. The factor analysis of the data set, conducted by PQ-method-2.11, gave a four-factor solution founded on statistical and theoretical criteria. The different factors represent the most prominent point of views that were present amongst the participants. The different factors were; Factor 1: Personal development, feedback and group experiences are valuable to me. Factor 2: I trust the system to facilitate my learning trough theory-based learning. Factor 3: I want feedback and group work, but I don’t trust the system . Factor 4: Theory-based learning is what I prefer. Group work is scary . In the thesis these findings are discussed in relation to the theoretical frames; personal competence, experiential learning, mindset and selfunderstanding.The aspects that are highlighted are what I have found to be most prominent and that could contribute to give a holistic picture of the data set.

Keywords

Eksperter i team, personlig kompetanse, Q-metode, Social and Behavioural Science, Law, personal competence, Experts in teamwork

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Green