# Applying Game Theory to Teach the PERT Scheduling Method
## 5 Analysis of Results
### Qualitative Analysis  
As previously mentioned, this research's qualitative analysis was conducted to understand the students' perceptions of the experience, the applied methodology, and the professor's performance. To mitigate potential biases, anonymity was ensured in the feedback collection process, and a diverse set of open-ended and scaled questions was employed. This approach reduced the likelihood of socially desirable responses and gave more authentic insights into the methodology's practicality and effectiveness. The study used a 19-question questionnaire, with 33 individuals asked to rate each question with a score from 1 to 7. Then, they had to answer three open questions related to the presentation of the content, the advantages and disadvantages of the method, and its application in scheduling construction projects. These questions measured the students' perceptions and strengthened the quantitative analysis carried out in a complementary way. The results obtained for each question are presented in Table 5. The information indicates that no individual rated questions with a score lower than 4 (the minimum threshold considered). Furthermore, the average for each question was higher than 6.24 out of 7, obtained by question 1 (I found the class interesting). In contrast, question 17 (The practical exercises were an excellent complement to the theory) received the highest average score within the questionnaire (6.73). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Question** & **Media** & **S.D.** & **Min** & **Max** \\ \hline Q1 & 6.24 & 0.87 & 4 & 7 \\ Q2 & 6.55 & 0.67 & 5 & 7 \\ Q3 & 6.61 & 0.61 & 5 & 7 \\ Q4 & 6.67 & 0.60 & 5 & 7 \\ Q5 & 6.52 & 0.76 & 4 & 7 \\ Q6 & 6.48 & 0.67 & 5 & 7 \\ Q7 & 6.45 & 0.71 & 5 & 7 \\ Q8 & 6.48 & 0.67 & 5 & 7 \\ Q9 & 6.27 & 0.88 & 4 & 7 \\ Q10 & 6.58 & 0.71 & 4 & 7 \\ Q11 & 6.33 & 0.82 & 4 & 7 \\ Q12 & 6.55 & 0.71 & 5 & 7 \\ Q13 & 6.42 & 0.87 & 4 & 7 \\ Q14 & 6.64 & 0.60 & 5 & 7 \\ Q15 & 6.48 & 0.71 & 5 & 7 \\ Q16 & 6.33 & 0.89 & 4 & 7 \\ Q17 & 6.73 & 0.67 & 4 & 7 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Summary statistics for perception survey questions. The open questions contained in the qualitative questionnaire (applied after the last assessment) were as follows (along with a summary of the students' answers per question):  
* Comment on the conceptual clarity and exposition of the contents. The students expressed clarity regarding the content transmitted, the professor's mastery of the subject, and the appropriate and rapid understanding of the method implemented. The majority of the opinions reflected a positive evaluation by the students regarding the class presentation, the practical lectures being well received, and having internalized the content in a more didactic way. Most of the opinions agreed that the proposed teaching method (Game Theory), due to its novelty and easy understanding, was crucial for achieving a greater understanding of the PERT scheduling method. * Comment on applying Game Theory to learning the PERT method (advantages or disadvantages). According to the responses given by the students, the Game Theory tool was consistent with the bibliographic review carried out for the development of this research. They also believed that Game Theory was a mathematical tool with great potential for decision-making involving time and costs. The advantages most repeated in the students' responses were that Game Theory helped to better understand decision-making, the simplicity of the method, and the clarity of its use. The disadvantages stated were that decisions in a real-world environment, with more decision variables involved, could make the method more difficult to use. * Do you consider the equilibrium studied in Game Theory and its application to the PERT method practical in decision-making when scheduling a construction project?