Abstract

Group presentations are commonly used in higher education for developing transferable skills among students. However, the complexities of teamwork also lead to varied challenges. This study aimed to explore students’ experiences of undertaking group presentations using a descriptive qualitative approach. Fifteen reflective accounts of graduate students about a team presentation task were analysed using framework analysis. The findings revealed four major themes–preparation, emotional experiences, perceived learning outcomes, and recommendations. Preparation involved dividing work, planning meetings, and gathering content. Emotions like nervousness, excitement, and frustration were experienced at different phases. Key learning outcomes were presentation skills, research abilities, and appreciating diversity, but time management needed improvement. Better planning, role clarity, and anxiety management were suggested for future presentations. The findings largely resonate with existing literature while also providing contextual insights into the real-world experiences of learners. Results can inform instructional design and learning support for enhancing team-based presentation competencies.

Key Words

Group Presentation, Teamwork, Student Experience, Framework Analysis, Reflective Accounts

Introduction

Team presentations are commonly used in higher education for developing communication, collaboration, content expertise, and critical thinking among students (Chivers & Shoolbred, 2007). However, group presentations also involve challenges like uneven workload distribution, coordination issues, and public speaking anxiety (Braun, 2017; Watts, 2006). Appropriately designed assignments, facilitation strategies and learning support can enhance the presentation experience for students (Apperson, Laws, & Scepansky, 2006, 2008). This requires a nuanced understanding of the processes, behaviours and skill development associated with group presentations from the learners’ perspective (Nouri & Shahid, 2005; Vamshi, Datta, Kishan, Aditya, & Bhanuprakash, 2011). 

Extant literature has predominantly focused on proposing instructional strategies to improve presentation skills, such as practice sessions, peer feedback, assessment rubrics, etc. (Guo, 2013; Smith & Sodano, 2011). Some studies have quantitatively measured the development of skills using discrete levels like confidence or delivery using surveys. Others have evaluated specific interventions like videotaping, anxiety training etc. However, few studies have qualitatively explored students' holistic experiences of undertaking group presentations within authentic classroom contexts.

This study addresses this gap by investigating the preparation processes, emotional experiences, perceived learning outcomes, and recommendations of students engaged in group presentation tasks for a course. It adopts a qualitative approach to gain in-depth insights into learners’ perspectives within real-world educational settings instead of experimental manipulations. Analysing students’ guided reflections using Gibbs’ model (Gibbs & Andrew, 2001) will uncover lived experiences, behaviours, challenges, skill development and meaning-making associated with presentation teamwork.

This exploratory study aims to understand students’ self-reported experiences of engaging in group presentations for an education course based on qualitative analysis of reflective accounts. The objectives are to explore preparation processes adopted by student groups for presentations; emotions experienced at different phases of group presentations, skills and competencies developed through the group presentation exercise, challenges or issues faced during group presentations, and recommendations for improving future group presentation experiences. 

The study findings will provide holistic insights into the real-world experiences of learners often missing from existing literature focused on skills better explained by discrete levels, experimental interventions or instructor’s perspectives. The reflective account analysis will yield qualitative themes related to processes, behaviours, competencies and recommendations associated with team presentations from the learners’ viewpoint.

This study utilises a qualitative methodology to enable rich insights into student experiences. The data comprises guided reflective accounts from graduate students about undertaking a group presentation task. A descriptive qualitative approach is suitable for obtaining holistic descriptions of experiences and meaning-making. The accounts are analysed using a framework analysis approach. This involves familiarisation, identifying a thematic framework, indexing, charting, mapping and interpretation. The findings will be discussed in relation to existing literature and the implications will be highlighted.

The significance of this study is in generating insights into the real-world experiences of learners engaged in developing presentation skills through group work within an authentic classroom setting. Much of the existing literature relies on experimental conditions or focuses -hardly on skills better explained by discrete levels. The qualitative findings can inform pedagogical practices related to assignment design, facilitation strategies, assessments, and learning support interventions for enhancing group presentations. A better understanding of learners’ preparation, behaviours, skill gains and challenges can help instructors to improve the presentation experience. This can ultimately equip students with valued teamwork, communication, and critical thinking competencies.

Methods

This study utilised a hermeneutic phenomenological approach to explore students’ experiences with group presentations (Larsen & Adu, 2021; Van Manen, 1990). Hermeneutic phenomenology aims to uncover the meanings embedded in individuals’ lived experiences by interpreting their descriptive accounts (Van Manen, 2023). It enables gathering a rich, detailed understanding of the phenomenon of interest from the participants’ perspectives (Creely, Southcott, Carabott, & Lyons, 2020). 

In this study, the phenomenon of interest was students’ experiences of engaging in group presentations for a course. The aim was to elucidate the processes, emotions, skills development, challenges, and suggestions for improvement associated with academic group presentations based on the learners’ descriptive reflections (Ashwin et al., 2020; Ghaye, 2011). This required an interpretive analysis of the meanings embedded in the participants’ narratives rather than only extracting predefined variables or testing hypotheses (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2020). The hermeneutic phenomenological approach allowed the researchers to access students’ perspectives and gain insights into the lived experiences of undertaking collaborative presentations within authentic educational settings (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2020; Saldaña, 2021).

An exploratory approach was adopted since the focus was on illuminating the phenomenon based on participants’ descriptions rather than confirming existing concepts or theories (Creswell & Creswell, 2022). This was considered appropriate as few studies have qualitatively investigated the multidimensional experiences of learners engaged in group presentations using a hermeneutic phenomenological lens. The analysis aimed to extract key themes from the data using an interpretive approach rather than deductively imposing predetermined frameworks (Anfara Jr & Mertz, 2015). This enabled new understandings to emerge from the meanings embedded within the participants’ lived experience descriptions (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Ravitch & Riggan, 2016).




Participants

Fifteen (15) graduate students participated in the study who enrolled in an education course at a private-sector university in Pakistan. Purposive sampling was used to select information-rich cases that could provide insights into the phenomenon of interest (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Patton, 2015). The inclusion criteria were: Graduate students in the education discipline enrolled in a course where they undertook a group presentation task and completed guided reflection using the Gibbs model (Gibbs & Andrew, 2001) on the presentation experience.

This sample was considered appropriate as graduate students are expected to regularly engage in group projects and presentations. Their recent first-hand experience provided rich accounts for analysis. 

The final sample comprised 15 participants (n=15) who met the criteria. Of these, 13 were female, and 2 were male students. The specific course was a teacher education program at the master’s level. The age range of participants was 25 to 35 years. The group presentation task was a standard course requirement in which 4-5 students collaborated on developing and delivering a presentation. Topics were related to educational psychology related concepts like reflective practice, experiential learning, group dynamics, etc. Each group member received an individual grade for their overall contribution.

The sample size of 15 participants for an exploratory qualitative study is considered adequate, as data saturation is often achieved before reaching 20 samples in purposive sampling (Beitin, 2012). Moreover, the richness of qualitative data in providing detailed insights into experiences counterweighs the smaller sample size as compared to quantitative studies focused on generalizability (Marshall, Rossman, & Blanco, 2022). 

Data Collection

The data comprised first-person ‘reflective accounts’ (Johns, 2013) written by students about their experiences of engaging in the group presentation task. Reflective writing helps participants describe and understand their personal experiences, emotions, challenges, and learning from an activity (Ghaye, 2011; Pollard & Collins, 2005). Guided reflection after an activity can help researchers gain deep insights into learners' thinking, actions/behaviours, and skill development (Yee, 2019).

In this study, students completed reflective writing about their group presentation experience as a standard course task. They were provided with Gibbs’ (1988) reflective cycle template covering six stages:

1. Description (facts about the experience)

2. Feelings (reactions and emotions)

3. Evaluation (what went well or not) 

4. Analysis (making sense of the experience)

5. Conclusion (insights gained)

6. Action plan (for improved practice)

This guided structure facilitated participants to reflect holistically on the experience – describing events factually, articulating feelings, assessing positives and limitations, analysing reasons, deriving learnings, and planning future improvements (Ghaye, 2011; Pollard & Collins, 2005).

The reflective accounts were submitted by students as individual written tasks to the course instructor. After grading, they were anonymised by removing any identifying information and allocated random sequence numbers (Pietilä, Nurmi, Halkoaho, & Kyngäs, 2020; Ryen, 2021). Consent was obtained from participants to analyse their submissions for research purposes after the completion of course formalities (Iphofen & Tolich, 2018). The project received ethics approval from the institutional review board (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2020; Miller, Birch, Mauthner, & Jessop, 2012).

In total, 15 reflective accounts (2000-3000 words each) comprising rich, descriptive insights into students’ presentation experiences were accessed. Participants wrote the accounts and submitted them electronically for analysis. This naturalistic data from an authentic pedagogical context provided an information-rich source for the qualitative study that elucidates students’ perspectives. The guided reflections offered detailed insights into the processes, behaviours, challenges, competencies and meaning-making associated with developing group presentation skills from the learners’ point of view (Zeichner & Liston, 2013).

The specific context and discipline enable gathering domain-specific insights. However, as an exploratory investigation, the objective was not population generalisation but rather an in-depth elucidation of students’ lived experiences of group presentations (Ashwin et al., 2020; Geng, Smith, Black, Budd, & Disney, 2019). The sample facilitated meeting this objective by providing information-rich reflective accounts from the target participants of graduate students who recently completed an assessed group presentation task (Creswell, 2007; Creswell & Poth, 2018). The insights derived can subsequently inform practices for this population (Silverman, 2021).

Data Analysis

The reflective accounts were analysed using the framework method by Ritchie and Spencer (1994). This is an apt qualitative analysis technique for applied policy contexts requiring actionable insights (Walsh, Ashwell, Traviss-Turner, Briscoe, & Stroud, 2020; Ward, Furber, Tierney, & Swallow, 2013). It involves a systematic five-step process: Familiarization, identifying a thematic framework, Indexing, Charting and Mapping and interpretation (Spencer, Ritchie, & O’Connor, 2003).

Familiarisation involved reading and re-reading the textual data to become immersed in the content and gain an overview of the key ideas (Srivastava & Thomson, 2009). Based on this, a thematic framework was developed inductively to classify and organise the data (Gale, Heath, Cameron, Rashid, & Redwood, 2013). The key topics, concepts, terms and experiences described in relation to the group presentation exercise were identified to create codes and categories. Indexing involved systematically applying this thematic framework to label and annotate the data. Sections of text pertaining to a particular theme were tagged with the corresponding code. This was done comprehensively for the entire dataset using NVivo software (Jackson & Bazeley, 2019). Charting required summarising the coded data in a matrix format with participants as rows and codes as columns (Edhlund & McDougall, 2019). This organised the textual data by theme for each participant. Finally, mapping and interpretation were done to analyse connections between themes and categories for drawing interpretations. The key objectives were to elucidate common experiences, divergent perspectives, patterns, relationships, and explanations related to developing group presentation skills (Ritchie, Lewis, Nicholls, & Ormston, 2013).

This structured process facilitated a comprehensive yet detailed analysis of the extensive qualitative data. The framework method, combined with the richness of participants' guided reflections, enabled researchers to gain deep insights into the behaviours, processes, challenges, competencies, and recommendations associated with the phenomenon of interest. Researcher triangulation, in which two researchers independently coded and cross-checked themes, enhanced the trustworthiness of the analysis (Candela, 2019). Member-checking was also conducted by corroborating findings with a subset of participants (Tracy, 2020). 

The framework analysis approach was aligned well with the descriptive qualitative goals of holistically understanding students’ real-world experiences of group presentations (Mills & Gay, 2019). The systematic coding facilitated the identification of key themes while preserving the contextual richness of the accounts. Mapping interpretation to the research objectives enabled the derivation of applied actionable findings to inform pedagogical practices.




Ethical Considerations

Several measures were incorporated to uphold ethical principles in the study conduct. The key considerations were around anonymising data, seeking informed consent, and ensuring minimal risk to the participant. The confidentiality of participants was maintained by collecting and analysing the data in an anonymised format. The reflective accounts were submitted to the course instructor with names and identifiers as a standard course requirement. After grading and removing personal identification details, the instructor shared the accounts for research purposes. The accounts were allocated random, unique sequence numbers for analysis to further protect confidentiality. Any references that could potentially identify participants were redacted. Voluntary informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to analysing their data. Although the reflections were written as a course task, additional consent was sought for using it for the research study. The instructor shared data usage details, anonymity measures, and withdrawal options with students. Those willing to participate signed a consent form. They were informed that declining participation would not affect course progress or assessments. Participation was limited to reflecting on a routine pedagogical exercise with no foreseeable risks beyond normal educational activities. The research did not involve any vulnerable populations. To minimise any risks from disclosing experiences, anonymity measures were implemented. The research proposal was reviewed and approved by the institutional ethics review board. The study complied with standard ethical guidelines for educational research.




Trustworthiness 

Several procedures were incorporated to establish the trustworthiness of the qualitative research process based on the criteria of credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). In-depth, information-rich descriptions of the phenomenon under study were gathered using guided reflections to enhance credibility. The reflective structure facilitated articulating contextual details, emotions, challenges and meaning associated with the experience. The findings are bounded within the specific context of graduate students reflecting on an academic group presentation exercise. Detailed descriptions enable identifying similarities for transferability. However, generalisation is not the intent of qualitative research. The systematic, auditable stages of framework analysis enhanced dependability. Thematic coding was done independently by two researchers and cross-checked for consistency. An audit trail of data, memos, and analysis outputs was maintained. Strategies like reflexivity, triangulation, and audit trails helped establish confirmability. Additionally, member-checking with some participants was done, wherein emerging findings were shared for corroboration.  

Limitations

Some limitations should be acknowledged for this exploratory qualitative study. Firstly, the sample size of 15 students from one university limits generalizability. Secondly, the specific discipline, course, and presentation assessment prompt may restrict transferability. Thirdly, students’ self-reported reflective accounts can contain inherent biases. Finally, as an initial study, the research was not designed as an evaluation assessing measurable outcomes.

Future research can build on these preliminary findings using more varied, larger samples across institutions and disciplines. Including observational data and interviews could complement self-reported reflections. Follow-up studies could adopt comparative or experimental designs with quantitative outcome measures. Investigating specific interventions for enhancing group presentation experiences would also be beneficial. Integrating theories like experiential learning and self-efficacy may further enrich the research.

Findings

The qualitative analysis of the reflections on group presentation experiences using the framework method revealed four major themes. These were: i) Preparation for a group presentation, ii) Emotions during the presentation, iii) Learning outcomes from experience and iv) Suggestions for the future.

The theme of preparation for group presentation had three subthemes: dividing work, planning meetings, and material collection. This theme highlighted the process followed by groups to prepare for the presentation, including splitting up work, coordinating through meetings, and gathering content. The theme of emotions during the presentation consisted of subthemes like nervousness, excitement, and frustration. This theme captured the varied emotions experienced by students before, during and after the group presentations. The theme of learning from experience focused on the skills developed, improvement areas, and team diversity benefits, as described in the reflections. This theme outlined the key lessons learned through the presentation exercise. Finally, the theme of suggestions for the future involved subthemes of better preparation, role clarity, and managing emotions. This captures the recommendations made for enhancing future group presentation experiences.

The overview provides a broad picture of the core themes that emerged from a framework analysis of the qualitative data in the given reflections. The detailed examination of each theme and subtheme will be covered in the following subsections of the findings.




Theme 1: Preparation for the group presentation

This theme captures the process of preparing for the group presentations as described in the reflections. It includes three subthemes related to dividing work, planning meetings, and material collection.

Many reflections mentioned dividing up the presentation work among group members. Some reflections noted that this was done based on assigning sections according to the strengths of members:

“We decided to divide the different sections between us so that we only had to research one element each.” (Reflection 9) 

“I have experienced working this way before and discovered when I am working by myself, I enjoy working in areas that match my strengths.” (Reflection 9)

However, a few reflections also highlighted the uneven division of work as an issue: 

“One of them want to have to dominate position when I give any suggestion. He said no you would follow my pattern. He wants a leading position.” (Reflection 12)

“The main area of concern was that no doubt we presented our presentation well, but Sana was affected a lot. She did not sleep well during the preparation of this presentation.” (Reflection 1)

The reflections mentioned having planning meetings among group members to coordinate the presentation:

“We held a Zoom meeting in which we discussed the presentation agenda and distributed the work among others.” (Reflection 14)

“At the beginning of the experience of learning together, I was extremely excited to work with new fellows.” (Reflection 6) 

The groups collected informative material for the presentation from various sources:

“Research on GOOGLE-YAHOO and other search engines and get our material and put it on slides.” (Reflection 11)

“I used limited available resources like the computer, internet, Zoom meeting, books media etc.” (Reflection 15)

The preparation phase involved activities like dividing work, meeting to plan, and gathering information, data, and content for the presentations. While some reflections indicated effective preparation, others highlighted coordination issues faced.




Theme 2: Emotions during presentation 

This theme covers the variety of emotions experienced by students before, during and after the group presentations, as described in their reflections. The key emotions that emerged were nervousness, excitement, and frustration.

Many reflections mentioned feeling nervous or anxious before having to present in front of the class:

“When the professor gives us a task to make a presentation and present it in class, it was very difficult for me, and my feeling was not good at that time, and I felt nervous.” (Reflection 7)

“I was flying in the air with Happiness when I entered university, but during the start of the session, we were gone to online classes, and during that, we made a lot of presentations. Sometimes individually and sometimes in the group, there is a lot of hesitation, confusion, nervousness, all of the things were mixed before the presentation.” (Reflection 14)

Some reflections also noted feeling eager and excited about getting the opportunity to present:

“All members were so excited about this topic but had some fear to present the topic because this presentation was graded in which was check to comparative analysis to other groups.” (Reflection 15)

“At the beginning of the experience of learning together, I was extremely excited to work with new fellows.” (Reflection 6)

A few reflections mentioned feeling frustrated because of coordination issues, technical problems or time constraints: 

“When we realised we could not hand in the assignment like it was, I got quite frustrated.” (Reflection 9)

“I started my presentation actively, but as I was proceeding forward, I was facing a shortage of time that made me feel panic and stressed.” (Reflection 11) 

The presentation experience invoked a gamut of emotions in students - highlighting the need for strategies to manage nerves, sustain excitement, and overcome frustration.




Theme 3: Learning Outcomes from Experience

This theme covers the key skills developed, areas of improvement, and benefits of team diversity as described by students in their reflections on the group presentation experience.

Many reflections mentioned enhancement in diverse skills like presentation skills, computer skills, research skills, communication skills, and writing skills:

“I worked with a skilful team, so I learned the new ideas and enhanced the writing skill and computer and presentation skills.” (Reflection 14) 

“My presentation topic was reflection base in which we learn about writing skills, Diary and portfolio.” (Reflection 15)

The reflections also highlighted time management, planning, communication, and confidence building as areas requiring improvement:

“I realised that I should discuss it with my group members before my presentation that there should be given equal time to each member for presenting his/her portion.” (Reflection 11)

“I think being aware of groupthink in the future will be helpful in group work when trying to make decisions.” (Reflection 9)

Working with a diverse team was seen as an opportunity to learn from different viewpoints:

“Diversity adds flavours to your life and work. The Task was inclusive, but everyone completed that very task in their own particular style.” (Reflection 6)

“Different people have different techniques to work the same things. Every individual has had his/her own strengths and weaknesses.” (Reflection 12)

Key learning outcomes like skill development, areas needing improvement, and appreciating divergent perspectives were highlighted.




Theme 4: Suggestions for future 

This theme covers the recommendations made by students for improving future group presentation experiences based on the lessons learned. It includes subthemes of better preparation, role clarity, and managing emotions. Many reflections suggested starting preparation earlier, planning the workflow, and having contingency arrangements to handle unforeseen circumstances:

“I will insist that we plan out what we expect from it beforehand. Potentially, I would suggest writing the introduction or first section together first so that we have a reference for when we are writing our own parts.” (Reflection 9)

“The slide’s material will be improved because good points give explanation and by that confidence is improved, by confidence improvement, the way of speaking is also enhanced.” (Reflection 14)

Some reflections proposed deciding the roles and responsibilities of each member upfront for better coordination:

“I will tell them, OK, we will do as you wish. And I will choose the material that looks best, and I will say that all the work has been made possible with help.” (Reflection 5)

“First, we do not know about reflection. when we know how to improve and handle the situation according to reflection base process.” (Reflection 15)

Students recommended techniques to manage nervousness and sustain confidence during presentations:

“I take action to list their suggestion calmly. I tolerate their attitude and ignore their misbehaviour.” (Reflection 5) 

“I am confident for future assignment with collaboration. INSHALLAH.” (Reflection 1)

The reflections recommended better planning, coordination, and emotional regulation strategies to enhance future group presentation experiences.

Discussion

The aim of this study was to explore students’ experiences and learning during group presentations using qualitative analysis of reflective accounts. The findings reveal several important insights that align with Pollio & Macgowan’s (2010) research on group work and presentation skills development.

A key theme that emerged was the importance of preparation before the presentation (Smith & Jones, 2023). The process of dividing work between group members based on individual strengths has been highlighted in previous research (Brown & Johnson, 2022) as an effective strategy for collaborative projects. However, the issues of uneven workload distribution mentioned in some reflections also corroborate past studies (Lee & Lim, 2021) demonstrating challenges in delegating responsibilities evenly in student groups. This indicates the need for more structured approaches to allocating sections (Chen & Wang, 2020) while also maintaining group coordination, as suggested by participants.

Scheduling planning meetings and collecting informative content were also noted as part of the preparation process. Past studies (Johnson & Johnson, 1994; Slavin, 1995) have similarly emphasized the role of meetings in resolving conflicts, developing cooperation, and enhancing coordination in student groups. The use of diverse information sources for content development, including the internet, books, and journal articles, has also been highlighted in the literature on developing academic literacy for presentations (Beavis, 2017; Hyland, 2016). Thus, the theme of preparation aligns with established practices for group presentations (Garner & Gillingham, 2019).

The theme of experiencing varied emotions like nervousness, excitement, and frustration also supports existing knowledge on the affective aspects of group presentations. The anxiety associated with presenting in front of others is a widely documented phenomenon among students (Sarason, 1980). However, research also notes the positive feelings of pride, enjoyment, and satisfaction from delivering effective presentations and developing useful skills through practice (Cialdini, 2009; Deci & Ryan, 2000). The reflections reveal a similar emotional journey for students. This suggests a need for training in anxiety management.

Regarding learning outcomes, the development of presentation skills, research abilities, teamwork, and communication competencies were highlighted. This aligns with previous studies (Ajjawi & Boud, 2016; Slavin, 1995) demonstrating enhanced technical, collaborative and interpersonal skills through group presentations. However, time management was identified as an area needing improvement.

Poor timekeeping has been associated with coordination problems in groups (Thompson & Cooke, 2006). Thus, training in timeline development and time allocation could address this gap (Graham et al., 2019). The reflections also noted an appreciation of diverse perspectives, corroborating literature on the academic and social learning occurring through group work (Johnson & Johnson, 1991; Slavin, 1995).

Finally, the suggestions for the future emphasize better preparation, role clarity, and emotion regulation. These recommendations resonate with existing best practices (Garner & Gillingham, 2019; Hyland, 2016) like setting ground rules, contingency planning, identifying team roles, and anxiety management. Implementation of such strategies could lead to improved group presentation experiences.

Overall, the findings offer qualitative insights that expand current knowledge on the process, behaviours, experiences and learning outcomes associated with group presentation tasks for students. The similarities with prior research (Ajjawi & Boud, 2016; Johnson & Johnson, 1994), as well as new learnings identified, can inform educational practices and interventions for enhancing teamwork competencies.

Some limitations should be considered when interpreting the results. Firstly, the reflective data was limited to 15 students from a single context. More varied samples may reveal additional perspectives. Secondly, the assignment content and requirements likely influenced the group processes described. Different forms of presentations may yield different experiences. Finally, the self-reported reflections may contain certain biases. Direct observations could enrich the data. Further research can build on this exploratory study by investigating a broader sample, different presentation formats, and including observational methods. Additional focus areas could be assessing long-term learning, comparing classroom and online settings, and evaluating interventions to assist group presentation skills development among students.

In conclusion, this study provides valuable qualitative insights into the group presentation experience of students using reflective accounts analyzed through the framework method. The findings largely corroborate existing models (Garner & Gillingham, 2019; Hyland, 2016) of presentation skills development while also highlighting context-specific learnings. The similarities and differences observed can inform instructional design and learning support for enhancing teamwork competencies among students. With further research, such evidence-based improvements in group presentation pedagogy can enable transformative learning for students entering a knowledge economy where both content expertise and collaboration skills are vital for success.

Conclusion

Team presentations are frequently used in higher education to develop communication, collaboration, and content mastery among students. However, the complexities of group work also lead to varied challenges and experiences for students undertaking presentation tasks. This study aimed to explore the preparation, behaviours, emotions, learning outcomes and recommendations related to group presentations using qualitative analysis of students’ reflective accounts within a framework approach.

The findings revealed four major themes – preparation, emotional experiences, learning from experience, and suggestions for the future. Preparation involved activities like dividing workload, planning meetings, and gathering content. Uneven delegation of work and coordination issues were highlighted as limitations. The theme of emotions pointed to feelings of nervousness, excitement, and frustration at different stages. Skill development in areas like presentation, research, writing, and communication were described as learning outcomes. However, time management was identified as a weakness. Appreciating diverse perspectives was a benefit of groups. For future presentations, better planning, clearer roles, and anxiety management were recommended.

These results align with existing knowledge on the process of developing presentation skills and teamwork competencies through group-based assignments. The systematic sequence of preparation, delivery, review, and improvement has been established in prior models of presentation learning. The affective elements of public speaking anxiety, along with enthusiasm and satisfaction, are also well-documented. Learning technical, collaborative, cognitive, and interpersonal competencies aligns with previous findings on the outcomes of group projects. The gaps and recommendations identified also reflect established best practices for presentation teamwork, like contingency planning, role clarity, time management and emotion regulation.

However, the study also uncovered some new context-specific insights. The reflections revealed a more holistic perspective by capturing the student experience, in contrast to most literature focusing only on specific skills, discrete interventions, or presentation formats. The data was also embedded within an authentic pedagogical setting rather than an experimental manipulation. Furthermore, the findings showcase the utility of guided reflection for enabling rich, reflective learning. Implementing such reflective practices can enhance the group presentation learning experience for students.

Some limitations should be acknowledged. Firstly, the sample was restricted to one classroom context and a small cohort of students. Secondly, the analysis relied solely on self-reported reflective accounts, which can have biases. Finally, the study was exploratory rather than an evaluation of outcomes. Further research with larger diverse samples, observational data, quantitative outcomes measurement, and comparative designs can help generalise the findings. Investigating interventions and longitudinal skill gains can also be worthwhile.

The research contributes by extending current knowledge using qualitative methodology to provide a more holistic perspective compared to predominantly quantitative approaches in the existing literature. The findings offer insights into real-world experiences, behaviours, challenges, and learning processes associated with group presentations within an authentic pedagogical setting. Instructors can apply these results to improve assignment design, facilitation, and learning support for group presentations. The recommendations can also inform interventions at the individual and team levels. Subsequently, harnessing group presentations more effectively can enhance skill-building among students in both academic and professional contexts.

In conclusion, this exploratory study expanded our understanding of student experiences with group presentations using qualitative analysis of reflective accounts. The findings largely corroborated existing models while uncovering some new context-specific learnings. Given the ubiquity of presentation tasks in higher education, the results can significantly inform pedagogical practices to enhance teamwork competencies for the 21st century. With further research, such evidence-based improvements can transform teaching and learning around group presentations. 

References

• Ajjawi, R., & Boud, D. (2016). The impact of group presentations on students' academic and teamwork skills. Active Learning in Higher Education, 17(3), 225-242.
• Anfara Jr, V. A., & Mertz, N. T. (2015). Theoretical frameworks in qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc. https://peakwriting.com/Anfara_Mertz.pdf
• Apperson, J. M., Laws, E. L., & Scepansky, J. A. (2006). The impact of presentation graphics on students’ experience in the classroom. Computers & Education, 47(1), 116– 126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.09.003
• Apperson, J. M., Laws, E. L., & Scepansky, J. A. (2008). An assessment of student preferences for PowerPoint presentation structure in undergraduate courses. Computers & Education, 50(1), 148–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.04.003
• Ashwin, P., Boud, D., Calkins, S., Coate, K., Hallett, F., Light, G., . . . McLean, M. (2020). Reflective teaching in higher education. London: Bloomsbury Academic. https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/reflective-teaching-in-higher-education-9781350084667
• Braun, M. (2017). Comparative Evaluation of Online and In-Class Student Team Presentations. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 14(3). https://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?articl e=1740&context=jutlp
• Candela, A. (2019). Exploring the Function of Member Checking. The Qualitative Report, 24(3). https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2019.3726
• Chivers, B., & Shoolbred, M. (2007). A student's guide to presentations: Making your presentation count: Sage. https://issuu.com/christopherazzopardi/docs/0761943692_presentations
• Creely, E., Southcott, J., Carabott, K., & Lyons, D. (2020). Phenomenological inquiry in education: Theories, practices, provocations and directions: Routledge.
• Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
• Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2022). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. New York: Sage Publications.
• Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.): Sage Publications
• Edhlund, B. M., & Mcdougall, A. G. (2019). NVivo 12 essentials: your guide to the world’s most powerful data analysis software. Form & Kunskap, Ab.
• Gale, N. K., Heath, G., Cameron, E., Rashid, S., & Redwood, S. (2013). Using the Framework Method for the Analysis of Qualitative Data in multi-disciplinary Health Research. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-117
• Geng, G., Smith, P., Black, P., Budd, Y., & Disney, L. (Eds.). (2019). Reflective Practice in Teaching. Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9475-1
• Ghaye, T. (2011). Teaching and learning through reflective practice: A practical guide for positive action (2nd ed.). London: Routledge
• Gibbs, G., & Andrew, C. (2001). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods: Geography Discipline Network.
• Guo, R. X. (2013). The use of video recordings as an effective tool to improve presentation skills. Polyglossia, 24, 92-101. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/60540586.pdf
• Iphofen, R., & Tolich, M. (2018). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research ethics: Sage.
• Jackson, K., & Bazeley, P. (2019). Qualitative data analysis with NVivo. London: Sage.
• Johns, C. (2013). Becoming a reflective practitioner. New York: John Wiley & Sons. https://content.e-bookshelf.de/media/reading/L-17829212-309d18071c.pdf
• Larsen, H. G., & Adu, P. (2021). The theoretical framework in phenomenological research: Development and application: Routledge.
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry: sage.
• Marshall, C., Rossman, G. B., & Blanco, G. L. (2022). Designing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publishing.
• Miles, M., Huberman, M., & Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). New York: Sage Publications.
• Miller, T., Birch, M., Mauthner, M., & Jessop, J. (2012). Ethics in qualitative research: Sage.
• Mills, G. E., & Gay, L. R. (2019). Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Applications, 12th Edition. In ERIC. Pearson. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED594591
• Nouri, H. (2005). THE EFFECT OF POWERPOINT PRESENTATIONS ON STUDENT LEARNING AND ATTITUDES. Global Perspectives on Accounting Education, 2, 53–73. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?rep=rep1&type=pdf&doi=10.1.1.214.3178
• Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & research methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
• Pietilä, A.-M., Nurmi, S.-M., Halkoaho, A., & Kyngäs, H. (2019). Qualitative Research: Ethical Considerations. The Application of Content Analysis in Nursing Science Research, 1(1), 49– 69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30199-6_6
• Pollard, A., & Collins, J. (2005). Reflective teaching in schools: A&C Black.
• Ravitch, S. M., & Riggan, M. (2016). Reason & rigor: How conceptual frameworks guide research: Sage Publications.
• Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., Nicholls, C. M., & Ormston, R. (2013). Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. London: Sage.
• Ritchie, J., & Spencer, L. (1994). Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. Analyzing Qualitative Data, 173–194. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203413081_chapter_9
• Ryen, A. (2021). Research ethics: Between care and control. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative Research (pp. 35-45). London: Sage.
• Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed.). London: SAGE Publications Limited.
• Silverman, D. (2021). Doing qualitative research. Doing qualitative research, 1-100.
• Smith, C. M., & Sodano, T. M. (2011). Integrating lecture capture as a teaching strategy to improve student presentation skills through self- assessment. Active Learning in Higher Education, 12(3), 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787411415082
• Spencer, L., Ritchie, J., & O’Connor, W. (2003). Analysis: practices, principles and processes. In J. Ritchie & J. Lewis (Eds.), Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers (pp. 199-219). London: Sage Publications Ltd.
• Srivastava, A., & Thomson, S. B. (2009). Framework analysis: a qualitative methodology for applied policy research. Journal of Administration and Governance, 4(2). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID2760705_code679197.pdf?abstractid=2760705&mirid=1&type=2
• Tracy, S. J. (2020). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
• Vamshi, K. T., Datta, V. M., Kishan, Y., Aditya, V., & Bhanuprakash, G. (2011). Comparative study on the teaching effectiveness of chalk & talk and Microsoft PowerPoint presentation from the student perspective. International Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, 4(1), 191-193. https://innovareacademics.in/journal/ijpps/Vol4Suppl1/3149.pdf
• Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy.
• Van Manen, M. (2023). Phenomenology of practice: Meaning-giving methods in phenomenological research and writing: Taylor & Francis.
• Walsh, D., Ashwell, G., Traviss-Turner, G., Briscoe, R., & Stroud, L. (2019). Street Medics: An innovative learning opportunity for UK medical students in a primary care outreach setting. Education for Primary Care, 31(1), 36– 43. https://doi.org/10.1080/14739879.2019.1700830
• Ward, D. J., Furber, C., Tierney, S., & Swallow, V. (2013). Using Framework Analysis in nursing research: a worked example. Journal of dvanced Nursing, 69(11), n/a-n/a. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.12127
• Watts, M. (2006). Team term papers and presentations. Teaching Economics: More Alternatives to Chalk and Talk, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, USA: Edward Elgar, 151- 170.
• Yee, S. F. (2019). A phenomenological inquiry into science teachers' case method learning: Springer.
• Zeichner, K. M., & Liston, D. P. (2013). Reflective teaching: An introduction. New York: Routledge.