Total views : 339

The Effect of Team Projects on Education Satisfaction


  • Department of Chinese, Sahmyook University, Seoul, Korea, Republic of
  • Department of Business Administration, Sahmyook University, Seoul, Korea, Republic of


Background/Objectives: By recognizing team efficacy, interpersonal relationship, and activeness in problem solving as key factors affecting class satisfaction, this study seeks to investigate their causality in actual university team project-based classes. Methods/Statistical Analysis: In this research, survey was performed to collect data. The total of 200 survey questionnaires was distributed during a break in the middle of class. Of them, 34 sets were excluded for missing response, plural response and lining of the same answer inappropriate for study research, leaving 166 sets for the final analysis. For this study research, IBM SPSS v22, IBM AMOS v22, and Microsoft Excel 2013 were utilized. Findings: As a result of this study, the attitude toward learning, team efficacy, and problem solving capability was found to have a positive effect on class satisfaction. Whereas interpersonal relationships showed no effect on class satisfaction, attitude toward learning and team efficacy showed a positive effect on interpersonal relationship and team efficacy showed an effect on problem solving capability. Interpersonal relationship and problem solving capability were found to function as a mediator among team efficacy, attitude toward learning and class satisfaction. Application/Improvements: Based on research results, interpersonal relationship is deemed most appropriate to improve problem solving capability. Also team efficacy and attitude toward learning were found to increase interpersonal relationship.


Attitude toward Learning, Class Satisfaction, Interpersonal Relationship, Problem Solving Capability.

Full Text:

 |  (PDF views: 260)


  • Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review. 1977; 84(2):191–215.
  • Lindsley DH, Brass DJ, Thomas JB. Efficacy-performing spirals: a multilevel perspective. Academy of Management Review. 1995; 20(3):645–78.
  • Gibson CB. Do they do what they believe they can? group efficacy and gruop effectivenesss across tasks and cultures. Academy of Management Journal. 1999; 42(2):138–52.
  • Goddard RD, Hoy WK, Hoy AW. Collective teacher efficacy: its meaning, measure, and impact on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal. 2000; 37(2):479–507.
  • Marshall V, Bonner D. Career anchors and the effects of downsizing: implications for generations and cultures at work: A preliminary investigation. Journal of European Industrial Training. 2003; 27(6):281–91.
  • Druskat VU, Kayes DC. Learning versus performance in short-term project teams. Small Group Research. 2000; 31(3):328–353.
  • Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E. Reflections on shared cognition. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2001; 22(2):195–202.
  • Mathieu JE, Heffner TS, Goodwin GF, Salas E, Cannon-Bowers JA. The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2000; 85(2):273–83.
  • Ancona DG, Caldwell DF. Demography and design: predictors of new product team performance. Organization Science. 1992; 3(3):3221–341.
  • Tuckman BW. Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin. 1965; 63(6):384–99.
  • Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BK, Anderson RE. Multivariate data analysis. 7th edn. Upper Saddle River: New Jersey, PrenticeHall; 2010.
  • Meyers LS, Gamst G, Guarino AJ. Applied multivariate research: design and interpretation. SAGE Publications: London; 2006.
  • Fornell C, Larcker D. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research. 1981; 18(1):39–50.
  • Ayyagari R, Grover V, Purvis R. Technostress: technological antecedents and implications. MIS Quarterly. 2011; 35(4):831–58.
  • Treiblmaier H, Filzmoser P. Exploratory factor analysis: how robust methods support the detection of hidden multivariate data structures in is research. Information and Management. 2010; 47(3):197–207.
  • Beavers AS. Lounsbury JW, Richards JK, Huck SW, Skolits GJ, Esquivel SL. Practical considerations for using exploratory factor analysis in educational research. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation. 2013; 18(6):1–13.
  • Costello AB, Osborne JW. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation. 2005; 10(7):1–9.
  • Ford JK, MacCallum RC, Tait M. The application of exploratory factor analysis in applied psychology: a critical review and analysis. Personnel Psychology. 1986; 39(1):291–314.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.