Embracing Meaningful Learning in Our Initial Systematic Review

In determining research objectives for our group’s systematic review, we chose mushrooms that grow in Indonesia as potential protein agents as the base topic. Therefore, we use oyster and champignon mushrooms as objects for our review. As we are from the same major, our objectives for writing this systematic review are similar: to learn more about food processing and technology. We prefer to use mushrooms for food processing which consist of foaming agents, water binding, gelling agents, emulsifiers, and protein fortification. Thus, our research objectives are to explore the utilization of mushrooms as protein agents in various processed foods in Indonesia. Based on the insights gathered from our group dynamics, I have realized the potential of leveraging the collective expertise of team members to achieve and improve research objectives. Our group dynamics are critical in aligning individual aspirations with team objectives, ensuring that our research efforts remain consistent with the larger goals.

Based on the systematic review our group has written, we now understand the basic needs and skills to create a systematic review that is intelligible and able to attract the attention of the readers. Furthermore, we now know our capabilities and limits when working on the systematic review, thus it is always us to divide the task according to our skills to obtain a systematic review efficiently and with a high quality. From the systematic review we wrote about mushrooms in Indonesia, we understand the potential of the mushroom in Indonesia as a protein agent and other usages in the food industry, more specifically the potential of oyster and champignon mushrooms. 

In searching the literature that our group conducted, it was carried out by paying attention to various aspects such as the quality of the source of origin so that our group knew if the source of the literature was reliable because the source was clear and reliable. The literature searched also needs to be considered relevant to the topic we want to discuss so that it can support the argument or hypothesis that our group wants to bring and explain. When looking for relevant articles and clear sources, our group used several keywords that intersect with our topic such as the keyword mushroom and others that are searched with various search engines. In each search engine used, it will be divided into each group member to search for literature so that searches do not collide, discussions are also always open when searching to discuss the relevance of the article you want to use and the ideas that exist when you want to raise what discussion makes each group member collaborate with each other hand in hand in searching for literature which then the results of this joint search are put together in a systematic review.

We approach reading projects in our group with a collaborative perspective and a shared feeling of responsibility. When we are given a reading assignment, we split the content among ourselves to ensure that each member has an equal portion of the effort. We set firm deadlines for finishing the readings and meet frequently to discuss our discoveries, views, and interpretations. We organize virtual meetings where we share our thoughts, insights, and questions about the readings. This enables us to blend our various viewpoints and thoughts, resulting in a rich and complete knowledge of the text. The atmosphere of our group is quite encouraging and empowering. We've built a strong trust and respect for one another, creating an open and supportive environment for exchanging ideas and engaging in meaningful debates. Everyone contributes enthusiastically and listens intently, which improves our collective learning experience. The dynamic of our group fosters growth, promotes critical thinking, and improves our overall knowledge of the topic.

During the systematic review process, our lecturer divided the tasks into four steps. Step one involved clarifying our research objective and creating a roadmap for the review. We had extensive group discussions to establish a shared foundation and conducted group calls to ensure equal participation. For the next assignment, we constructed the abstract together and individually worked on tasks like determining search strategy keywords and familiarizing ourselves with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) approach. In the third assignment, we held a group call to ensure everyone understood the assignment, particularly data extraction. Tasks were divided equally among members using the "ladder shuffle" feature in the LINE app. The final assignment required us to combine and complete all sections of the systematic review in IMRaD format: introduction, methodology, results, and discussion. For this task, we assigned specific individuals based on their expertise. For example, person A, who had more experience and a better understanding of conducting PRISMA and data extraction, was assigned to write the methodology.

Throughout these assignments, we have gained valuable insights into the process of composing a comprehensive systematic review, including the methodologies for searching and filtering primary articles to be included in our final analysis. These tasks have not only enhanced our proficiency in scholarly writing but have also challenged our critical thinking abilities, particularly when determining the optimal research objective. Overall, our group consists of proactive and supportive individuals, which fosters a collaborative and balanced dynamic. We were also pleased that we maintain flexibility in completing our assignments, not overly relying on each other but also not working too independently or exhibiting individualistic attitudes.