Volume 7, Issue 2 (June 2025)
IEEPJ 2025, 7(2): 1-17 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Abedini M. (2025). The Effect of Meetings Management Using the UML Method on the Development of Problem-Solving Skills among Personnel in the Education Department. IEEPJ. 7(2), 1-17. doi:10.22034/ieepj.2025.7.2.865
URL: http://ieepj.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-958-en.html
URL: http://ieepj.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-958-en.html
Assistant Professor and Faculty Member Department of Educational Administration, Farhangian University, Tehran, Iran , mahnoosh_abedini@yahoo.com
Abstract: (1159 Views)
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of meeting management using the UML method on enhancing problem-solving skills among education department personnel in Qeshm.
Methods: A semi-experimental design with pre-test and post-test control groups was employed. The study sample included 40 participants randomly assigned to test and control groups. The test group received training on managing meetings using the UML method through six structured sessions, while the control group did not receive such training. Problem-solving skills were assessed using a six-factor questionnaire developed by Cassidy and Long, which evaluated indigence, control, innovation, contact, opposition (avoidance), and self-confidence. Pre-test and post-test data were analyzed using descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation) and inferential methods (analysis of covariance).
Results: Results indicated a significant improvement in problem-solving skills in the test group compared to the control group. Specifically, the UML-based meeting management enhanced participants' abilities in all six problem-solving domains. Training sessions helped participants develop clearer communication, greater confidence, and improved innovation in addressing challenges.
Conclusions: These findings underscore the effectiveness of UML as a structured method for meeting management, particularly in fostering problem-solving skills in educational settings. Given its impact on both individual and organizational development, the UML method offers a practical framework for enhancing meeting efficiency and addressing professional challenges. This approach can be widely adopted in similar contexts to support personnel development and promote collaborative problem-solving.
Methods: A semi-experimental design with pre-test and post-test control groups was employed. The study sample included 40 participants randomly assigned to test and control groups. The test group received training on managing meetings using the UML method through six structured sessions, while the control group did not receive such training. Problem-solving skills were assessed using a six-factor questionnaire developed by Cassidy and Long, which evaluated indigence, control, innovation, contact, opposition (avoidance), and self-confidence. Pre-test and post-test data were analyzed using descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation) and inferential methods (analysis of covariance).
Results: Results indicated a significant improvement in problem-solving skills in the test group compared to the control group. Specifically, the UML-based meeting management enhanced participants' abilities in all six problem-solving domains. Training sessions helped participants develop clearer communication, greater confidence, and improved innovation in addressing challenges.
Conclusions: These findings underscore the effectiveness of UML as a structured method for meeting management, particularly in fostering problem-solving skills in educational settings. Given its impact on both individual and organizational development, the UML method offers a practical framework for enhancing meeting efficiency and addressing professional challenges. This approach can be widely adopted in similar contexts to support personnel development and promote collaborative problem-solving.
Type of Study: Original |
Subject:
Educational Psychology
Received: 2024/12/16 | Accepted: 2025/05/28 | Published: 2025/06/1
Received: 2024/12/16 | Accepted: 2025/05/28 | Published: 2025/06/1
References
1. Akhtari, A., Najafi, M., & Shabani, G. (2007). Administrative meetings of managers. Tehran: Jamal al-Haq.
2. Atkinson, R. L., Atkinson, R. C., Smith, E. E., Bem, D. J., & Hoeksema, S. N. (2004). Hilgard's introduction to psychology (Vol. 1). (M. N. Baraheni et al., Trans.). Tehran: Roshd.
3. Balsamo, S., & Marzolla, M. (2003). A simulation-based approach to software performance modeling. Proceedings of the 9th European Software Engineering Conference held jointly with the 11th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, 363-366. ACM Press. [DOI:10.1145/940071.940122]
4. Bonaceto, C., & Burns, K. (2005). Using cognitive engineering to improve systems engineering. Available online. [DOI:10.1037/e577272012-064]
5. Butler, J. K. (1994). Conflict style and outcomes in negotiation with fully integrative potential. International Journal of Conflict Management, 5, 309-312. [DOI:10.1108/eb022749]
6. Cassidy, T., & Long, C. (1996). Problem-solving style, stress, and psychological illness: Development of a multifactorial. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 35, 256-277. [DOI:10.1111/j.2044-8260.1996.tb01181.x]
7. Dalaver, A. (2010). Research methods in humanities and social sciences. Tehran: Roshd.
8. Gagne, R. M. (1985). The condition of learning and theory of instruction (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc.
9. Gebretsadik, K. K. (2020). Challenges and opportunity of UML diagram for software project development as a complete modeling tool. Journal of Computer Engineering, 22(3), 17-19.
10. Ghaem, M. A. (2013). Management of meetings and public speaking. Tehran: Jamal al-Haq.
11. Herman, J. G., & Herman, J. L. (1994/2005). Planning change and innovation in educational management (A. Alagheband, Trans.). Tehran: Arasbaran.
12. Hidari, H. (2011). Introduction to research methodology in behavioral sciences. Tehran: SAMT.
13. Homayoun, H. A. (2007). Understanding the scientific method in behavioral sciences. Tehran: SAMT.
14. Jonassen, D. H. (2009). Learning to solve problems: An instructional design guide. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. [DOI:10.1080/15332276.2009.11673538]
15. Jonassen, D. H., Tessmer, M., & Hannum, W. H. (1999). Task analysis methods for instructional design. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. [DOI:10.4324/9781410602657]
16. Karimi, A. (2008). Curriculum: Effective meeting management. Central Organization of Islamic Azad University, Office of Human Resources Education Studies.
17. Lu, Y., & Alexandru, C. (2023). Systematic review of UML diagramming software tools for higher education software engineering courses. UKICER '23: Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on United Kingdom & Ireland Computing Education Research, Article No.: 4, Pages 1-7. [DOI:10.1145/3610969.3611123]
18. Maruyama, R., Ogata, S., Kayama, M., Tachi, N., Nagai, T., & Taguchi, N. (2022). An educational Unified Modeling Language programming environment and its two case studies. International Association for Development of the Information Society, International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA) (19th, 2022).
19. Nezu, A. M. (1986). Efficacy of a social problem-solving therapy approach for unipolar depression. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 54, 196-202. [DOI:10.1037/0022-006X.54.2.196]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
