benefits of group work for students essay

Eberly Center

Teaching excellence & educational innovation, what are the benefits of group work.

“More hands make for lighter work.” “Two heads are better than one.” “The more the merrier.”

These adages speak to the potential groups have to be more productive, creative, and motivated than individuals on their own.

Benefits for students

Group projects can help students develop a host of skills that are increasingly important in the professional world (Caruso & Woolley, 2008; Mannix & Neale, 2005). Positive group experiences, moreover, have been shown to contribute to student learning, retention and overall college success (Astin, 1997; Tinto, 1998; National Survey of Student Engagement, 2006).

Properly structured, group projects can reinforce skills that are relevant to both group and individual work, including the ability to: 

• Break complex tasks into parts and steps
• Plan and manage time
• Refine understanding through discussion and explanation
• Give and receive feedback on performance
• Challenge assumptions
• Develop stronger communication skills.

Group projects can also help students develop skills specific to collaborative efforts, allowing students to...

• Tackle more complex problems than they could on their own.
• Delegate roles and responsibilities.
• Share diverse perspectives.
• Pool knowledge and skills.
• Hold one another (and be held) accountable.
• Receive social support and encouragement to take risks.
• Develop new approaches to resolving differences. 
• Establish a shared identity with other group members.
• Find effective peers to emulate.
• Develop their own voice and perspectives in relation to peers.

While the potential learning benefits of group work are significant, simply assigning group work is no guarantee that these goals will be achieved. In fact, group projects can – and often do – backfire badly when they are not designed , supervised , and assessed in a way that promotes meaningful teamwork and deep collaboration.

Benefits for instructors

Faculty can often assign more complex, authentic problems to groups of students than they could to individuals. Group work also introduces more unpredictability in teaching, since groups may approach tasks and solve problems in novel, interesting ways. This can be refreshing for instructors. Additionally, group assignments can be useful when there are a limited number of viable project topics to distribute among students. And they can reduce the number of final products instructors have to grade.

Whatever the benefits in terms of teaching, instructors should take care only to assign as group work tasks that truly fulfill the learning objectives of the course and lend themselves to collaboration. Instructors should also be aware that group projects can add work for faculty at different points in the semester and introduce its own grading complexities .

Astin, A. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Caruso, H.M., & Wooley, A.W. (2008). Harnessing the power of emergent interdependence to promote diverse team collaboration. Diversity and Groups. 11, 245-266.

Mannix, E., & Neale, M.A. (2005). What differences make a difference? The promise and reality of diverse teams in organizations. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 6(2), 31-55.

National Survey of Student Engagement Report. (2006). http://nsse.iub.edu/NSSE_2006_Annual_Report/docs/NSSE_2006_Annual_Report.pdf .

Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

• Request a Consultation
• Workshops and Virtual Conversations
• Technical Support
• Course Design and Preparation
• Observation & Feedback

Teaching Resources

Benefits of Group Work

Resource overview.

Why using group work in your class can improve student learning

There are several benefits for including group work in your class.  Sharing these benefits with your students in a transparent manner helps them understand how group work can improve learning and prepare them for life experiences (Taylor 2011).  The benefits of group work include the following:

• Students engaged in group work, or cooperative learning, show increased individual achievement compared to students working alone.  For example, in their meta-analysis examining over 168 studies of undergraduate students, Johnson et al. (2014) determined that students learning in a collaborative situation had greater knowledge acquisition, retention of material, and higher-order problem solving and reasoning abilities than students working alone. There are several reasons for this difference. Students’ interactions and discussions with others allow the group to construct new knowledge, place it within a conceptual framework of existing knowledge, and then refine and assess what they know and do not know. This group dialogue helps them make sense of what they are learning and what they still need to understand or learn (Ambrose et al. 2010; Eberlein et al. 2008). In addition, groups can tackle more complex problems than individuals can and thus have the potential to gain more expertise and become more engaged in a discipline (Qin et al 1995; Kuh 2007). Group work creates more opportunities for critical thinking and can promote student learning and achievement.
• Student group work enhances communication and other professional development skills.  Estimates indicate that 80% of all employees work in group settings (Attle & Baker 2007). Therefore, employers value effective oral and written communication skills as well as the ability to work effectively within diverse groups (ABET 2016-2017; Finelli et al. 2011).  Creating facilitated opportunities for group work in your class allows students to enhance their skills in working effectively with others (Bennett & Gadlin 2012; Jackson et al. 2014). Group work gives students the opportunity to engage in process skills critical for processing information, and evaluating and solving problems, as well as management skills through the use of roles within groups, and assessment skills involved in assessing options to make decisions about their group’s final answer. All of these skills are critical to successful teamwork both in the classroom and the workplace.

Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, Inc. Criteria for accrediting Engineering Programs (ABET), 2016-2017  http://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation-criteria/criteria-for-accrediting-engineering-programs-2016-2017/

Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., Lovett, M. C., DiPietro, M., & Norman, M. K. (2010).  How learning works: 7 research-based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Attle, S., & Baker, B. 2007 Cooperative learning in a competitive environment: Classroom applications.  International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education ,  19 (1), 77-83.

Bennett, L. M., & Gadlin, H. (2012). Collaboration and team science.  Journal of Investigative Medicine ,  60 (5), 768-775.

Davidson, N., & Major, C. H. (2014). Boundary crossings: Cooperative learning, collaborative learning, and problem-based learning.  Journal on Excellence in College Teaching ,  25 (3/4), 7-55.

Eberlein, T., Kampmeier, J., Minderhout, V., Moog, R. S., Platt, T., Varma‐Nelson, P., & White, H. B. (2008). Pedagogies of engagement in science.  Biochemistry and molecular biology education ,  36 (4), 262-273.

Finelli, C. J., Bergom, I., & Mesa, V. (2011). Student teams in the engineering classroom and beyond: Setting up students for success.  CRLT Occasional Papers ,  29 .

Jackson, D., Sibson, R., & Riebe, L. (2014). Undergraduate perceptions of the development of team-working skills.  Education+ Training ,  56 (1), 7-20.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (2014). Cooperative learning: Improving university instruction by basing practice on validated theory.  Journal on Excellence in University Teaching ,  25 (4), 1-26.

Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J. A., Bridges, B. K., & Hayek, J. C. (2007). Piecing Together the Student Success Puzzle: Research, Propositions, and Recommendations. ASHE Higher Education Report, Volume 32, Number 5.  ASHE Higher Education Report ,  32 (5), 1-182.

Qin, Z., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1995). Cooperative versus competitive efforts and problem solving.  Review of educational Research, 65 (2), 129-143.

Taylor, A. (2011). Top 10 reasons students dislike working in small groups… and why I do it anyway.  Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education ,  39 (3), 219-220.

How to write a Reflection on Group Work Essay

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

Learn about our Editorial Process

Here are the exact steps you need to follow for a reflection on group work essay.

• Explain what Reflection Is
• Explore the benefits of group work
• Explore the challenges group
• Give examples of the benefits and challenges your group faced
• Discuss how your group handled your challenges
• Discuss what you will do differently next time

Do you have to reflect on how your group work project went?

This is a super common essay that teachers assign. So, let’s have a look at how you can go about writing a superb reflection on your group work project that should get great grades.

The essay structure I outline below takes the funnel approach to essay writing: it starts broad and general, then zooms in on your specific group’s situation.

Disclaimer: Make sure you check with your teacher to see if this is a good style to use for your essay. Take a draft to your teacher to get their feedback on whether it’s what they’re looking for!

This is a 6-step essay (the 7 th step is editing!). Here’s a general rule for how much depth to go into depending on your word count:

• 1500 word essay – one paragraph for each step, plus a paragraph each for the introduction and conclusion ;
• 3000 word essay – two paragraphs for each step, plus a paragraph each for the introduction and conclusion;
• 300 – 500 word essay – one or two sentences for each step.

Adjust this essay plan depending on your teacher’s requirements and remember to always ask your teacher, a classmate or a professional tutor to review the piece before submitting.

Here’s the steps I’ll outline for you in this advice article:

Step 1. Explain what ‘Reflection’ Is

You might have heard that you need to define your terms in essays. Well, the most important term in this essay is ‘reflection’.

So, let’s have a look at what reflection is…

Reflection is the process of:

• Pausing and looking back at what has just happened; then
• Thinking about how you can get better next time.

Reflection is encouraged in most professions because it’s believed that reflection helps you to become better at your job – we could say ‘reflection makes you a better practitioner’.

Think about it: let’s say you did a speech in front of a crowd. Then, you looked at video footage of that speech and realised you said ‘um’ and ‘ah’ too many times. Next time, you’re going to focus on not saying ‘um’ so that you’ll do a better job next time, right?

Well, that’s reflection: thinking about what happened and how you can do better next time.

It’s really important that you do both of the above two points in your essay. You can’t just say what happened. You need to say how you will do better next time in order to get a top grade on this group work reflection essay.

Scholarly Sources to Cite for Step 1

Okay, so you have a good general idea of what reflection is. Now, what scholarly sources should you use when explaining reflection? Below, I’m going to give you two basic sources that would usually be enough for an undergraduate essay. I’ll also suggest two more sources for further reading if you really want to shine!

I recommend these two sources to cite when explaining what reflective practice is and how it occurs. They are two of the central sources on reflective practice:

• Describe what happened during the group work process
• Explain how you felt during the group work process
• Look at the good and bad aspects of the group work process
• What were some of the things that got in the way of success? What were some things that helped you succeed?
• What could you have done differently to improve the situation?
• Action plan. What are you going to do next time to make the group work process better?
• What? Explain what happened
• So What? Explain what you learned
• Now What? What can I do next time to make the group work process better?

Possible Sources:

Bassot, B. (2015).  The reflective practice guide: An interdisciplinary approach to critical reflection . Routledge.

Brock, A. (2014). What is reflection and reflective practice?. In  The Early Years Reflective Practice Handbook  (pp. 25-39). Routledge.

Gibbs, G. (1988)  Learning by Doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods . Further Education Unit, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford.

Rolfe, G., Freshwater, D., Jasper, M. (2001). Critical reflection in nursing and the helping professions: a user’s guide. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Extension Sources for Top Students

Now, if you want to go deeper and really show off your knowledge, have a look at these two scholars:

• John Dewey – the first major scholar to come up with the idea of reflective practice
• Donald Schön – technical rationality, reflection in action vs. reflection on action

Get a Pdf of this article for class

Enjoy subscriber-only access to this article’s pdf

Step 2. Explore the general benefits of group work for learning

Once you have given an explanation of what group work is (and hopefully cited Gibbs, Rolfe, Dewey or Schon), I recommend digging into the benefits of group work for your own learning.

The teacher gave you a group work task for a reason: what is that reason?

You’ll need to explain the reasons group work is beneficial for you. This will show your teacher that you understand what group work is supposed to achieve. Here’s some ideas:

• Multiple Perspectives. Group work helps you to see things from other people’s perspectives. If you did the task on your own, you might not have thought of some of the ideas that your team members contributed to the project.
• Contribution of Unique Skills. Each team member might have a different set of skills they can bring to the table. You can explain how groups can make the most of different team members’ strengths to make the final contribution as good as it can be. For example, one team member might be good at IT and might be able to put together a strong final presentation, while another member might be a pro at researching using google scholar so they got the task of doing the initial scholarly research.
• Improved Communication Skills. Group work projects help you to work on your communication skills. Communication skills required in group work projects include speaking in turn, speaking up when you have ideas, actively listening to other team members’ contributions, and crucially making compromises for the good of the team.
• Learn to Manage Workplace Conflict. Lastly, your teachers often assign you group work tasks so you can learn to manage conflict and disagreement. You’ll come across this a whole lot in the workplace, so your teachers want you to have some experience being professional while handling disagreements.

You might be able to add more ideas to this list, or you might just want to select one or two from that list to write about depending on the length requirements for the essay.

Scholarly Sources for Step 3

Make sure you provide citations for these points above. You might want to use google scholar or google books and type in ‘Benefits of group work’ to find some quality scholarly sources to cite.

Step 3. Explore the general challenges group work can cause

Step 3 is the mirror image of Step 2. For this step, explore the challenges posed by group work.

Students are usually pretty good at this step because you can usually think of some aspects of group work that made you anxious or frustrated. Here are a few common challenges that group work causes:

• Time Consuming. You need to organize meetups and often can’t move onto the next component of the project until everyone has agree to move on. When working on your own you can just crack on and get it done. So, team work often takes a lot of time and requires significant pre-planning so you don’t miss your submission deadlines!
• Learning Style Conflicts. Different people learn in different ways. Some of us like to get everything done at the last minute or are not very meticulous in our writing. Others of us are very organized and detailed and get anxious when things don’t go exactly how we expect. This leads to conflict and frustration in a group work setting.
• Free Loaders. Usually in a group work project there’s people who do more work than others. The issue of free loaders is always going to be a challenge in group work, and you can discuss in this section how ensuring individual accountability to the group is a common group work issue.
• Communication Breakdown. This is one especially for online students. It’s often the case that you email team members your ideas or to ask them to reply by a deadline and you don’t hear back from them. Regular communication is an important part of group work, yet sometimes your team members will let you down on this part.

As with Step 3, consider adding more points to this list if you need to, or selecting one or two if your essay is only a short one.

8 Pros And Cons Of Group Work At University

You’ll probably find you can cite the same scholarly sources for both steps 2 and 3 because if a source discusses the benefits of group work it’ll probably also discuss the challenges.

Step 4. Explore the specific benefits and challenges your group faced

Step 4 is where you zoom in on your group’s specific challenges. Have a think: what were the issues you really struggled with as a group?

• Was one team member absent for a few of the group meetings?
• Did the group have to change some deadlines due to lack of time?
• Were there any specific disagreements you had to work through?
• Did a group member drop out of the group part way through?
• Were there any communication break downs?

Feel free to also mention some things your group did really well. Have a think about these examples:

• Was one member of the group really good at organizing you all?
• Did you make some good professional relationships?
• Did a group member help you to see something from an entirely new perspective?
• Did working in a group help you to feel like you weren’t lost and alone in the process of completing the group work component of your course?

Here, because you’re talking about your own perspectives, it’s usually okay to use first person language (but check with your teacher). You are also talking about your own point of view so citations might not be quite as necessary, but it’s still a good idea to add in one or two citations – perhaps to the sources you cited in Steps 2 and 3?

Step 5. Discuss how your group managed your challenges

Step 5 is where you can explore how you worked to overcome some of the challenges you mentioned in Step 4.

So, have a think:

• Did your group make any changes part way through the project to address some challenges you faced?
• Did you set roles or delegate tasks to help ensure the group work process went smoothly?
• Did you contact your teacher at any point for advice on how to progress in the group work scenario?
• Did you use technology such as Google Docs or Facebook Messenger to help you to collaborate more effectively as a team?

In this step, you should be showing how your team was proactive in reflecting on your group work progress and making changes throughout the process to ensure it ran as smoothly as possible. This act of making little changes throughout the group work process is what’s called ‘Reflection in Action’ (Schön, 2017).

Scholarly Source for Step 5

Schön, D. A. (2017).  The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action . Routledge.

Step 6. Conclude by exploring what you will do differently next time

Step 6 is the most important step, and the one far too many students skip. For Step 6, you need to show how you not only reflected on what happened but also are able to use that reflection for personal growth into the future.

This is the heart and soul of your piece: here, you’re tying everything together and showing why reflection is so important!

This is the ‘action plan’ step in Gibbs’ cycle (you might want to cite Gibbs in this section!).

For Step 6, make some suggestions about how (based on your reflection) you now have some takeaway tips that you’ll bring forward to improve your group work skills next time. Here’s some ideas:

• Will you work harder next time to set deadlines in advance?
• Will you ensure you set clearer group roles next time to ensure the process runs more smoothly?
• Will you use a different type of technology (such as Google Docs) to ensure group communication goes more smoothly?
• Will you make sure you ask for help from your teacher earlier on in the process when you face challenges?
• Will you try harder to see things from everyone’s perspectives so there’s less conflict?

This step will be personalized based upon your own group work challenges and how you felt about the group work process. Even if you think your group worked really well together, I recommend you still come up with one or two ideas for continual improvement. Your teacher will want to see that you used reflection to strive for continual self-improvement.

Scholarly Source for Step 6

Step 7. edit.

Okay, you’ve got the nuts and bolts of the assessment put together now! Next, all you’ve got to do is write up the introduction and conclusion then edit the piece to make sure you keep growing your grades.

Here’s a few important suggestions for this last point:

• You should always write your introduction and conclusion last. They will be easier to write now that you’ve completed the main ‘body’ of the essay;
• Use my 5-step I.N.T.R.O method to write your introduction;
• Use my 5 C’s Conclusion method to write your conclusion;
• Use my 5 tips for editing an essay to edit it;
• Use the ProWritingAid app to get advice on how to improve your grammar and spelling. Make sure to also use the report on sentence length. It finds sentences that are too long and gives you advice on how to shorten them – such a good strategy for improving evaluative essay  quality!
• Make sure you contact your teacher and ask for a one-to-one tutorial to go through the piece before submitting. This article only gives general advice, and you might need to make changes based upon the specific essay requirements that your teacher has provided.

That’s it! 7 steps to writing a quality group work reflection essay. I hope you found it useful. If you liked this post and want more clear and specific advice on writing great essays, I recommend signing up to my personal tutor mailing list.

Let’s sum up with those 7 steps one last time:

• Explain what ‘Reflection’ Is
• Explore the benefits of group work for learning
• Explore the challenges of group work for learning
• Explore the specific benefits and challenges your group faced
• Discuss how your group managed your challenges
• Conclude by exploring what you will do differently next time

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 10 Reasons you’re Perpetually Single
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 20 Montessori Toddler Bedrooms (Design Inspiration)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 21 Montessori Homeschool Setups
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 101 Hidden Talents Examples

2 thoughts on “How to write a Reflection on Group Work Essay”

Great instructions on writing a reflection essay. I would not change anything.

Thanks so much for your feedback! I really appreciate it. – Chris.

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• Our Mission

Group Work That Works

Educators weigh in on solutions to the common pitfalls of group work.

Mention group work and you’re confronted with pointed questions and criticisms. The big problems, according to our audience: One or two students do all the work; it can be hard on introverts; and grading the group isn’t fair to the individuals.

But the research suggests that a certain amount of group work is beneficial.

“The most effective creative process alternates between time in groups, collaboration, interaction, and conversation... [and] times of solitude, where something different happens cognitively in your brain,” says Dr. Keith Sawyer, a researcher on creativity and collaboration, and author of Group Genius: The Creative Power of Collaboration .

So we looked through our archives and reached out to educators on Facebook to find out what solutions they’ve come up with for these common problems.

Making Sure Everyone Participates

“How many times have we put students in groups only to watch them interact with their laptops instead of each other? Or complain about a lazy teammate?” asks Mary Burns, a former French, Latin, and English middle and high school teacher who now offers professional development in technology integration.

Unequal participation is perhaps the most common complaint about group work. Still, a review of Edutopia’s archives—and the tens of thousands of insights we receive in comments and reactions to our articles—revealed a handful of practices that educators use to promote equal participation. These involve setting out clear expectations for group work, increasing accountability among participants, and nurturing a productive group work dynamic.

Norms: At Aptos Middle School in San Francisco, the first step for group work is establishing group norms. Taji Allen-Sanchez, a sixth- and seventh-grade science teacher, lists expectations on the whiteboard, such as “everyone contributes” and “help others do things for themselves.”

For ambitious projects, Mikel Grady Jones, a high school math teacher in Houston, takes it a step further, asking her students to sign a group contract in which they agree on how they’ll divide the tasks and on expectations like “we all promise to do our work on time.” Heather Wolpert-Gawron, an English middle school teacher in Los Angeles, suggests creating a classroom contract with your students at the start of the year, so that agreed-upon norms can be referenced each time a new group activity begins.

Group size: It’s a simple fix, but the size of the groups can help establish the right dynamics. Generally, smaller groups are better because students can’t get away with hiding while the work is completed by others.

“When there is less room to hide, nonparticipation is more difficult,” says Burns. She recommends groups of four to five students, while Brande Tucker Arthur, a 10th-grade biology teacher in Lynchburg, Virginia, recommends even smaller groups of two or three students.

Meaningful roles: Roles can play an important part in keeping students accountable, but not all roles are helpful. A role like materials manager, for example, won’t actively engage a student in contributing to a group problem; the roles must be both meaningful and interdependent.

At University Park Campus School , a grade 7–12 school in Worcester, Massachusetts, students take on highly interdependent roles like summarizer, questioner, and clarifier. In an ongoing project, the questioner asks probing questions about the problem and suggests a few ideas on how to solve it, while the clarifier attempts to clear up any confusion, restates the problem, and selects a possible strategy the group will use as they move forward.

At Design 39, a K–8 school in San Diego, groups and roles are assigned randomly using Random Team Generator , but ClassDojo , Team Shake , and drawing students’ names from a container can also do the trick. In a practice called vertical learning, Design 39 students conduct group work publicly, writing out their thought processes on whiteboards to facilitate group feedback. The combination of randomizing teams and public sharing exposes students to a range of problem-solving approaches, gets them more comfortable with making mistakes, promotes teamwork, and allows kids to utilize different skill sets during each project.

Rich tasks: Making sure that a project is challenging and compelling is critical. A rich task is a problem that has multiple pathways to the solution and that one person would have difficulty solving on their own.

In an eighth-grade math class at Design 39, one recent rich task explored the concept of how monetary investments grow: Groups were tasked with solving exponential growth problems using simple and compound interest rates.

Rich tasks are not just for math class. When Dan St. Louis, the principal of University Park, was a teacher, he asked his English students to come up with a group definition of the word Orwellian . They did this through the jigsaw method, a type of grouping strategy that John Hattie’s study Visible Learning ranked as highly effective.

“Five groups of five students might each read a different news article about the modern world,” says St. Louis. “Then each student would join a new group of five where they need to explain their previous group’s article to each other and make connections to each. Using these connections, the group must then construct a definition of the word Orwellian .” For another example of the jigsaw approach, see this video from Cult of Pedagogy.

Supporting Introverts

Teachers worry about the impact of group work on introverts. Some of our educators suggest that giving introverts choice in who they’re grouped with can help them feel more comfortable.

“Even the quietest students are usually comfortable and confident when they are with peers with whom they connect,” says Shelly Kunkle, a veteran teacher at Wasawee Middle School in North Webster, Indiana. Wolpert-Gawron asks her students to list four peers they want to work with and then makes sure to pair them with one from their list.

Having defined roles within groups—like clarifier or questioner—also provides structure for students who may be less comfortable within complex social dynamics, and ensures that introverts don’t get overshadowed by their more extroverted peers.

Finally, be mindful that introverted students often simply need time to recharge. “Many introverts do not mind and even enjoy interacting in groups as long as they get some quiet time and solitude to recharge. It’s not about being shy or feeling unsafe in a large group,” says Barb Larochelle, a recently retired high school English teacher in Edmonton, Alberta, who taught for 29 years.

“I planned classes with some time to work quietly alone, some time to interact in smaller groups or as a whole class, and some time to get up and move around a little. A whole class of any one of those is going to be hard on one group, but a balance works well.”

Assessing Group Work

Grading group work is problematic. Often, you don’t have a clear understanding of what each student knows, and a single student’s lack of effort can torpedo the group grade. To some degree, strategies that assign meaningful roles or that require public presentations from groups provide a window in to each student’s knowledge and contributions.

But not all classwork needs to be graded. Suzanna Kruger, a high school science teacher in Seaside, Oregon, doesn’t grade group work—there are plenty of individual assignments that receive grades, and plenty of other opportunities for formative assessment.

John McCarthy, a former high school English and social studies teacher and current education consultant and adjunct professor at Madonna University for the graduate department for education, suggests using group presentations or group products as a non-graded review for a test. But if you want to grade group work, he recommends making all academic assessments within group work individual assessments. For example, instead of grading a group presentation, McCarthy grades each student on an essay, which the students then use to create their group presentation.

Laura Moffit, a fifth-grade teacher in Wilmington, North Carolina, uses self and peer evaluations to shed light on how each student is contributing to group work—starting with a lesson on how to do an objective evaluation. “Just have students circle :), :|, or :( on three to five statements about each partner, anonymously,” Moffit commented on Facebook. “Then give the evaluations back to each group member. Finding out what people really think of your performance is a wake-up call.”

And Ted Malefyt, a middle school science teacher in Hamilton, Michigan, carries a clipboard with the class list formatted in a spreadsheet and walks around checking in on students while they do group work.

“Using this spreadsheet, you have your own record of which student is meeting your expectations and who needs extra help,” explains Malefyt. “As formative assessment takes place, quickly document with simple checkmarks.”

• The Student Experience
• Financial Aid
• Degree Finder
• Undergraduate Arts & Sciences
• Departments and Programs
• Research, Scholarship & Creativity
• Centers & Institutes
• Geisel School of Medicine
• Guarini School of Graduate & Advanced Studies
• Thayer School of Engineering
• Tuck School of Business

Campus Life

• Diversity & Inclusion
• Athletics & Recreation
• Student Groups & Activities
• Residential Life
• [email protected] Contact & Department Info Mail
• Diversity Statement
• Impact Reports
• Experiential Learning
• Gateway Initiative
• Online Learning
• Apgar Award for Innovation in Teaching
• Annual Reports
• Consultation
• Universal Design for Learning Institute
• Graduate Student and Postdoc Programs
• Learning Fellows Program
• New Faculty Programs
• On-Demand Seminars
• Resources for New Faculty
• Teaching & Learning Principles
• Preparing to Teach: Exploring Beliefs
• Knowledge for Teaching
• Student Development
• Recommended Reading
• Course Design - Getting Started
• Learning Outcomes
• Planning for Assessment
• Syllabus Guide
• Universal Design in Education
• Resilient Course Design
• Wellbeing in Course Design
• Academic Continuity During Disruption
• Nuts & Bolts
• First Day of Class
• Effective Lecturing

Student Group Work

• Inclusive Teaching
• Creating Accessible Materials
• Anti-Racist Pedagogy
• Teaching With Generative AI
• Formative Assessments
• Grading & Feedback
• Saving Time While Grading
• End-of-Term Evaluations
• Classroom Observations
• Other Sources of Teaching Support
• Schedules, Calendars, Maps
• Reserving the Teaching Center
• Funding Opportunities
• News & Events

Search form

• Teaching & Learning Foundations
• Course Design & Preparation
• Evaluating Teaching & Learning
• Dartmouth References

Group work has been shown to support deep learning, long-term information retention, strengthened communication and teamwork skills, and a greater sense of purpose and dedication to course materials––if groups are formed thoughtfully and given clear parameters ( Monson ;  Oakley et. al. ;  Davis ). Many students and faculty alike have (or have heard) horror stories about group work gone awry. But, research and student feedback show that with a bit of preparation, clear guidelines, and mechanisms for group troubleshooting in place, group work can be more than worth the effort. 

Setting Groups Up for Success

"Professors have three major responsibilities concerning the implementation of [group work]––forming groups, training students to be effective collaborators, and managing collaborative groups." ––B.W. Speck

There are many ways to use student groups in your classes, from informal, short-term think-pair-share duos to small discussion groups that are formed and disbanded each class session, writing circles that persist for an entire essay cycle, and formal, long-term groups collaborating on a major course assignment. All of them require some level of instructor guidance on how groups should be formed, how group work should be approached, and what the goals of the work are. In some cases, asking students to turn to a classmate and share a question or comment is sufficient preparation. In others, much more scaffolding needs to be in place if students are to navigate their work successfully as a group. See the figure below for a quick overview of what such scaffolding might look like, based on the duration and goals of group work. 

three-panel_detailed_storyboard.png

For the purposes of this article, we will focus on groups that will be working together for a week or more, because the length and complexity of the work such groups do together requires more planning and support. While the specific needs of such groups will depend upon the nature of the assignment, subject matter, and course learning objectives, the literature on group formation and collaborative student work provides some important considerations that are relevant to many cases, across disciplines. Here, these considerations are broken out into three categories: group formation, group training, and group management. 

Note: COVID has, predictably, affected students' experience of group work, and not only due to the pivot to remote learning. For an in depth discussion of COVID and student group work, see "Student Teamwork During COVID-19: Challenges, Changes, and Consequences" ( Wildman, et. al. ). Click here to see a  summary of the paper's key insights .

Group Formation

For long-term collaborations, groups should be created by instructors . 

Student-selected groups are  more likely to lead to "social slacking" and self-segregation .

Additionally, student-selected groups  are less likely to lead to interdependence and collaboration . Students in the same group may end up breaking apart the project and working separately, or, one student may end up bearing the brunt of the workload.

One study indicated that "students found by a two-to-one ratio that their worst group work experiences were with self-formed groups" ( Feitchner and Davis ).

Self-selected groups  tend to be homogeneous  in terms of student skill-level and subject-matter experience, gender, and race.

For many types of group work, the ideal group size is 3-4 students . 

Exceptions include groups formed for  team-based-learning , which works well with 5-7 students, and  ensemble practices in the arts , which range widely in group size.  STEM-specific studies  suggest groups of 3-5. 

These smaller sizes help ensure that every group member has a meaningful role, while also making sure that there are enough perspectives represented to prevent inquiry from stalling (see group training, below, for resources on group roles). 

In general: "The less skilful the group members, the smaller the groups should be. The shorter amount of time available, the smaller the groups should be" ( Davis ).

Groups thrive when their members are diverse  (in terms of skill, prior subject-matter experience, and, yes, demographics). 

More specifically, "groups that are gender-balanced, are ethnically diverse, and have members with different problem-solving approaches have been shown to exhibit enhanced collaboration" ( Wilson, Brickman, and Brame ).

Conversely,  minority group members are most successful––in your class, and in their academic lives more generally––when they aren't isolated.

Isolated students may not feel empowered to speak and contribute at the same level as their fellow group members. "Studies have shown that when members of at-risk minority groups are isolated in project teams, they tend either to adopt relatively passive roles within the team or are relegated to such roles, thereby losing many of the benefits of the team interactivity" ( Heller and Hollobaugh  qtd in  Oakley et. al. ).

We know, for example, that men are 1.6x more likely to speak in class than women ( Lee and McCabe  2021). This issue is compounded by isolation within groups. 

In fact, such unsuccessful group experiences may contribute to student retention issues: "The isolation these individuals feel within their teams could also contribute to a broader sense of isolation in the student body at large, which may in turn increase the dropout risk" ( Heller and Hollobaugh  qtd in  Oakley et. al. ).

There is some evidence that  teamwork- or working-style has more of an impact on group cohesion than prior academic experience or skill  with the subject matter.

"Generally, groups that are gender-balanced, are ethnically diverse, and have members with different problem-solving approaches have been shown to exhibit enhanced collaboration. The data on academic performance as a diversity factor do not point to a single conclusion" ( Wilson, Brickman, and Brame ).

And, finally, from a logistical viewpoint: if you don't provide dedicated group working time in class,  group members will need common blocks of free time  to meet outside of class.

X-hours can be fantastic as dedicated group-work time, if your course plan allows. 

Group Training

"When a professor assumes that students will automatically work well together and provides little or no training in group success, groups can fall apart." ––B.W. Speck

Students express higher levels of satisfaction when instructors are explicit about the process and expectations of group work.  

Setting expectations can help ameliorate student aversion to group work rooted in past negative experiences ( Felder and Brent  1996).

Groups tend not to differentiate between "social loafers" and team members who are struggling with the project or course content, exhibiting destructive behavior toward group members who fall into either category equally. By being transparent about the benefits of group work as well as the expectations about how group work should proceed, instructors can prevent much of this potential for group dysfunction ( Freeman and Greenacre ).

Giving students individual (rotating) roles within their group can help instill individual ownership of the project as well as foster collaboration and interdependence.

For instance,  Oakley et. al.  outline a four person team using the following roles:

Coordinator - "keeps everyone on task and makes sure everyone is involved."

Recorder - "prepares the final solution to be turned in."

Monitor - "checks to make sure everyone understands both the solution and the strategy used to get it."

Checker - "double-checks it before it is handed in." 

Other roles might include:

Encourager  - "encourages group members to continue to think through their approaches and ideas. The Encourager uses probing questions to help facilitate deeper thinking, and group-wide consideration of ideas" ( Fournier ).

Questioner - "pushes back when the team comes to consensus too quickly, without considering a number of options or points of view. The questioner makes sure that the group hears varied points of view, and that the group is not avoiding potentially rich areas of disagreement" ( Fournier ).

Reflector / Strategy Analyst - "observes team dynamics and guides the consensus-building process (helps group members come to a common conclusion)" ( Fournier ).

Spokesperson / Presenter - "presents the group's ideas to the rest of the class. The Spokesperson should rely on the recorder's notes to guide their report" ( Fournier ).

Requiring group members to rotate through these roles during the term "can help students develop communications skills in a variety of areas rather than relying on a single personal strength" ( Fournier ).

Functional groups develop "norms," "charters," or social contracts with agreed upon behaviors, values, and conflict-management practices. 

For example, The 3 Be's of Collaborative Writing B.W. Speck uses with collaborative writing groups: 

Be Responsible

Be Organized

3beswriting0.png

The University of Connecticut Writing Center offers this  group contract  template to be used after forming groups, but before assigning roles as a means to "prevent group discord" and "create a consensus on expectations.

Group Management

Even the most strategically formed groups may still fail if they aren't given sufficient guidance, or management. Some of the most important things to consider when determining how you and your students will work together to manage groups are: 

Group Persistence  (will students stay in a single group all term, or will groups be formed and reformed throughout the term?)

Motivation  (what scaffolding needs to be in place to keep groups motivated?)

"To promote both accountability and autonomy, instructors should create milestones and deadlines for groups but also provide time for the students to expressly assign duties and roles to meet those deadlines" ( Wilson, Brickman, and Brame ).

Dartmouth faculty member, Professor Deborah Brooks, recommends building in opportunities for  Peer Recognition . 

For discussion groups, you may want to consider occasional opportunities for  peer shout outs   (for example, a student might want to shout out a group member who helped them understand something in a new way). 

For longer, more formal group projects,  peer awards  can offer groups a fun way to recognize and celebrate their work as well as providing faculty some insight into the way groups worked together. 

Assessment  (how will group and individual work be assessed? how will students assess their own work and the group as a whole?)

Although it may not be appropriate for all types of group work to be graded, for group projects or assignments, it can be beneficial to assess both the work of the group as a whole and the work of individual group members.

Felder and Brent suggest:

Giving "individual tests that cover all of the material on the team assignments and projects" ( Felder and Brent  2007).

Making "groups responsible for seeing that non-contributors don't get credit" ( Felder and Brent  2007).

Using "peer ratings to make individual adjustments to team assignment grades" ( Felder and Brent  2007).

In addition to assessment via grading, it is important to structure in opportunities for student and group self-assessment.

"Once or twice during the group work task," Barbara Gross Davis suggests, "ask group members to discuss two questions: What action has each member taken that was helpful for the group? What action could each member take to make the group even better?" ( Davis ).

Felder and Brent suggest making plans for "periodic self-assessment of team functioning" every few weeks via written responses to questions such as ( Felder and Brent  2007):

How well are we meeting our goals and expectations?

What are we doing well?

What needs improvement?

What (if anything) will we do differently next time?

Troubleshooting  (what happens when groups encounter a problem? what if a group fails to cohere?)

Make a contingency plan to chart out what happens when

Students drop the course, leaving groups too small or imbalance

A group fails to cohere.

Some research suggests that giving students the ability to "fire" a group member who isn't contributing can be an effective strategy ( Felder and Brent  2007).

But resist the urge to dissolve and reform groups frequently.

Studies have shown that:

"It takes at least [one month] for the teams to encounter problems, and learning to work through the problems is an important part of teamwork skill development" ( Felder and Brent  2007).

Build in opportunities for students to tell you how the group work is going:

"Conduct a midterm assessment to find out how students feel about teamwork" ( Felder and Brent  2007).

and,  Opportunities for Reflection and Feedback ( will students have a chance to reflect on their group work? how will students report what's happening in their group to you? how will you provide feedback to groups?)

Thomas Wenzel notes that peer- and self-assessment, combined with instructor observations, are critical in courses using group work not only to identify dysfunctional groups but also to identify the contributions of each group member ( Wenzel ). 

See this  Team Peer Assessment  developed by Angela R. Linse of the Schreyer Institute for Teaching Excellence 

See the final pages of  Oakley et. al.  for a useful set of reflective and evaluative worksheets. Namely:

Evaluation of Progress Toward Effective Team Functioning

Team Member Evaluation Form

Peer Rating of Team Members

Autorating System

Note: peer rating and assessment are likely to be most useful as a conversation starter regarding group dynamics and norms.

Team Formation Tool

The Team Formation Tool, a Canvas app developed at Dartmouth, is a survey-based tool for the creation of optimized student groups. With the Team Formation Tool, instructors can create custom surveys designed to sort students into groups based on a cluster of predetermined criteria including time zone, teamwork and working style, preferred time of day to study, and more.

To learn more about the Team Formation Tool, read the overview here or contact  [email protected] . To have the Team Formation Tool installed in your Canvas course, submit a  Canvas Support Request here , and enter Team Formation Tool Installation in the  Short Description of Problem  field.

Additional Resources

Using Student Groups in Your Teaching

Episode 073 - Team Based Learning with Jim Sibley , Teaching in Higher Ed Podcast

Babson College  Group Project Survival Guide

Effective Strategies for Cooperative Learning .

CBE––Life Sciences Education evidence-based teaching guide for Group Work .

Alison Burke's  article, " How to Use Groups Effectively ."

Curated list of resources about  Collaborative Learning & Group Work

Curated list of  podcast episodes about group learning

Teach Remotely: Collaborative Projects  discussion, facilitated by DCAL

Davis, Barbara Gross. Tools for Teaching. Vol. 1st ed, Jossey-Bass, 1993. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,url,uid&db=nlebk&AN=26088&site=ehost-live&scope=site. 

Feichtner, S. B., and E. A. Davis. "Why Some Groups Fail: A Survey of Students' Experiences with Learning Groups." Journal of Management Education, vol. 9, no. 4, Nov. 1984, pp. 58–73. DOI.org (Crossref), doi: 10.1177/105256298400900409 .

Felder, Richard M., and Rebecca Brent. "Navigating the Bumpy Road to Student-Centered Instruction." College Teaching, vol. 44, no. 2, Apr. 1996, pp. 43–47. DOI.org (Crossref), doi: 10.1080/87567555.1996.9933425 .

Felder, Richard M., and Rebecca Brent. "Cooperative Learning." Active Learning, edited by Patricia Ann Mabrouk, vol. 970, American Chemical Society, 2007, pp. 34–53. DOI.org (Crossref), doi: 10.1021/bk-2007-0970.ch004 .

Fournier, Eric. "Using Roles in Group Work." Washington University in St. Louis Center for Teaching and Learning,  https://ctl.wustl.edu/resources/using-roles-in-group-work/ . Accessed 2 Feb. 2021.

Freeman, Lynne, and Luke Greenacre. "An Examination of Socially Destructive Behaviors in Group Work." Journal of Marketing Education - J Market Educ, vol. 33, Apr. 2011, pp. 5–17. ResearchGate, doi: 10.1177/0273475310389150 .

Gaunt, Helena, and Danielle Shannon Treacy. "Ensemble Practices in the Arts: A Reflective Matrix to Enhance Team Work and Collaborative Learning in Higher Education." Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, vol. 19, no. 4, SAGE Publications, Oct. 2020, pp. 419–44. SAGE Journals, doi: 10.1177/1474022219885791 .

Hassanien, Ahmed. "Student Experience of Group Work and Group Assessment in Higher Education." Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, vol. 6, no. 1, July 2006, pp. 17–39. DOI.org (Crossref), doi: 10.1300/J172v06n01_02 .

Heller, Patricia, and Mark Hollabaugh. "Teaching Problem Solving through Cooperative Grouping. Part 2: Designing Problems and Structuring Groups." American Journal of Physics, vol. 60, no. 7, American Association of Physics Teachers, July 1992, pp. 637–44. aapt.scitation.org (Atypon), doi: 10.1119/1.17118 .

Monson, Renee. "Groups That Work: Student Achievement in Group Research Projects and Effects on Individual Learning." Teaching Sociology, vol. 45, no. 3, SAGE Publications Inc, July 2017, pp. 240–51. SAGE Journals, doi: 10.1177/0092055X17697772 .

Oakley, Barbara, et al. "Turning Student Groups into Effective Teams." Journal of Student Centered Learning, vol. 2, no. 1, 2004, pp. 9-34.  https://www.engr.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/drive/1ofGhdOciEwloA2zofffqkr7jG3SeKRq3/2004-Oakley-paper(JSCL).pdf  

Speck, Bruce W. Facilitating Students' Collaborative Writing. Jossey-Bass, 2002,  https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/ERIC-ED466716/pdf/ERIC-ED466716.pdf , Accessed 2 Feb 2021

Wenzel, Thomas J. "Evaluation Tools To Guide Students' Peer-Assessment and Self-Assessment in Group Activities for the Lab and Classroom." Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 84, no. 1, 2007, p. 182.

Wildman, Jessica, et al. "Student Teamwork During COVID-19: Challenges, Changes, and Consequences." Small Group Research, vol. 0, no. 0, 2021, pp. 1–16.

Wilson, KJ, et al. "Evidence Based Teaching Guide: Group Work." CBE Life Science Education,  http://lse.ascb.org/evidence-based-teaching-guides/group-work/ . Accessed 2 Feb. 2021.

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Group work as an incentive for learning – students’ experiences of group work.

• Division of Psychology, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden

Group work is used as a means for learning at all levels in educational systems. There is strong scientific support for the benefits of having students learning and working in groups. Nevertheless, studies about what occurs in groups during group work and which factors actually influence the students’ ability to learn is still lacking. Similarly, the question of why some group work is successful and other group work results in the opposite is still unsolved. The aim of this article is to add to the current level of knowledge and understandings regarding the essence behind successful group work in higher education. This research is focused on the students’ experiences of group work and learning in groups, which is an almost non-existing aspect of research on group work prior to the beginning of the 21st century. A primary aim is to give university students a voice in the matter by elucidating the students’ positive and negative points of view and how the students assess learning when working in groups. Furthermore, the students’ explanations of why some group work ends up being a positive experience resulting in successful learning, while in other cases, the result is the reverse, are of interest. Data were collected through a study-specific questionnaire, with multiple choice and open-ended questions. The questionnaires were distributed to students in different study programs at two universities in Sweden. The present result is based on a reanalysis and qualitative analysis formed a key part of the study. The results indicate that most of the students’ experiences involved group work that facilitated learning, especially in the area of academic knowledge. Three important prerequisites (learning, study-social function, and organization) for group work that served as an effective pedagogy and as an incentive for learning were identified and discussed. All three abstractions facilitate or hamper students’ learning, as well as impact their experiences with group work.

Introduction

Group work is used as a means for learning at all levels in most educational systems, from compulsory education to higher education. The overarching purpose of group work in educational practice is to serve as an incentive for learning. For example, it is believed that the students involved in the group activity should “learn something.” This prerequisite has influenced previous research to predominantly focus on how to increase efficiency in group work and how to understand why some group work turns out favorably and other group work sessions result in the opposite. The review of previous research shows that in the 20th century, there has been an increase in research about students’ cooperation in the classroom ( Lou et al., 1996 ; Gillies and Boyle, 2010 , 2011 ). This increasing interest can be traced back to the fact that both researchers and teachers have become aware of the positive effects that collaboration might have on students’ ability to learn. The main concern in the research area has been on how interaction and cooperation among students influence learning and problem solving in groups ( Hammar Chiriac, 2011a , b ).

Two approaches concerning learning in group are of interest, namely cooperative learning and collaborative learning . There seems to be a certain amount of confusion concerning how these concepts are to be interpreted and used, as well as what they actually signify. Often the conceptions are used synonymously even though there are some differentiations. Cooperative group work is usually considered as a comprehensive umbrella concept for several modes of student active working modes ( Johnson and Johnson, 1975 ; Webb and Palincsar, 1996 ), whereas collaboration is a more of an exclusive concept and may be included in the much wider concept cooperation ( Hammar Chiriac, 2011a , b ). Cooperative learning may describe group work without any interaction between the students (i.e., the student may just be sitting next to each other; Bennet and Dunne, 1992 ; Galton and Williamson, 1992 ), while collaborative learning always includes interaction, collaboration, and utilization of the group’s competences ( Bennet and Dunne, 1992 ; Galton and Williamson, 1992 ; Webb and Palincsar, 1996 ).

At the present time, there is strong scientific support for the benefits of students learning and working in groups. In addition, the research shows that collaborative work promotes both academic achievement and collaborative abilities ( Johnson and Johnson, 2004 ; Baines et al., 2007 ; Gillies and Boyle, 2010 , 2011 ). According to Gillies and Boyle (2011) , the benefits are consistent irrespective of age (pre-school to college) and/or curriculum. When working interactively with others, students learn to inquire, share ideas, clarify differences, problem-solve, and construct new understandings. Gillies (2003a , b ) also stresses that students working together are more motivated to achieve than they would be when working individually. Thus, group work might serve as an incentive for learning, in terms of both academic knowledge and interpersonal skills. Nevertheless, studies about what occur in groups during group work and which factors actually influence the students’ ability to learn is still lacking in the literature, especially when it comes to addressing the students’ points of view, with some exceptions ( Cantwell and Andrews, 2002 ; Underwood, 2003 ; Peterson and Miller, 2004 ; Hansen, 2006 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ). Similarly, the question of why some group work turns out successfully and other work results in the opposite is still unsolved. In this article, we hope to contribute some new pieces of information concerning the why some group work results in positive experiences and learning, while others result in the opposite.

Group Work in Education

Group work is frequently used in higher education as a pedagogical mode in the classroom, and it is viewed as equivalent to any other pedagogical practice (i.e., whole class lesson or individual work). Without considering the pros and cons of group work, a non-reflective choice of pedagogical mode might end up resulting in less desirable consequences. A reflective choice, on the other hand, might result in positive experiences and enhanced learning ( Galton et al., 2009 ; Gillies and Boyle, 2011 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ).

Group Work as Objective or Means

Group work might serve different purposes. As mentioned above, the overall purpose of the group work in education is that the students who participate in group work “learn something.” Learning can be in terms of academic knowledge or “group knowledge.” Group knowledge refers to learning to work in groups ( Kutnick and Beredondini, 2009 ; Gillies and Boyle, 2010 , 2011 ; Hammar Chiriac, 2011a , b ). Affiliation, fellowship, and welfare might be of equal importance as academic knowledge, or they may even be prerequisites for learning. Thus, the group and the group work serve more functions than just than “just” being a pedagogical mode. Hence, before group work is implemented, it is important to consider the purpose the group assignment will have as the objective, the means, or both.

From a learning perspective, group work might function as both an objective (i.e., learning collaborative abilities) and as the means (i.e., a base for academic achievement) or both ( Gillies, 2003a , b ; Johnson and Johnson, 2004 ; Baines et al., 2007 ). If the purpose of the group work is to serve as an objective, the group’s function is to promote students’ development of group work abilities, such as social training and interpersonal skills. If, on the other hand, group work is used as a means to acquire academic knowledge, the group and the collaboration in the group become a base for students’ knowledge acquisition ( Gillies, 2003a , b ; Johnson and Johnson, 2004 ; Baines et al., 2007 ). The group contributes to the acquisition of knowledge and stimulates learning, thus promoting academic performance. Naturally, group work can be considered to be a learning environment, where group work is used both as an objective and as the means. One example of this concept is in the case of tutorial groups in problem-based learning. Both functions are important and might complement and/or even promote each other. Albeit used for different purposes, both approaches might serve as an incentive for learning, emphasizing different aspect knowledge, and learning in a group within an educational setting.

Working in a Group or as a Group

Even if group work is often defined as “pupils working together as a group or a team,” ( Blatchford et al., 2003 , p. 155), it is important to bear in mind that group work is not just one activity, but several activities with different conditions ( Hammar Chiriac, 2008 , 2010 ). This implies that group work may change characteristics several times during a group work session and/or during a group’s lifetime, thus suggesting that certain working modes may be better suited for different parts of a group’s work and vice versa ( Hammar Chiriac, 2008 , 2010 ). It is also important to differentiate between how the work is accomplished in the group, whether by working in a group or working as a group.

From a group work perspective, there are two primary ways of discussing cooperation in groups: working in a group (cooperation) or working as a group (collaboration; Underwood, 2003 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ). Situations where students are sitting together in a group but working individually on separate parts of a group assignment are referred to as working in a group . This is not an uncommon situation within an educational setting ( Gillies and Boyle, 2011 ). Cooperation between students might occur, but it is not necessary to accomplish the group’s task. At the end of the task, the students put their separate contributions together into a joint product ( Galton and Williamson, 1992 ; Hammar Chiriac, 2010 , 2011a ). While no cooperative activities are mandatory while working in a group, cooperative learning may occur. However, the benefits in this case are an effect of social facilitation ( Zajonc, 1980 ; Baron, 1986 ; Uziel, 2007 ) and are not caused by cooperation. In this situation, social facilitation alludes to the enhanced motivational effect that the presence of other students have on individual student’s performance.

Working as a group, on the other hand, causes learning benefits from collaboration with other group members. Working as a group is often referred to as “real group work” or “meaningful group work,” and denotes group work in which students utilizes the group members’ skills and work together to achieve a common goal. Moreover, working as a group presupposes collaboration, and that all group members will be involved in and working on a common task to produce a joint outcome ( Bennet and Dunne, 1992 ; Galton and Williamson, 1992 ; Webb and Palincsar, 1996 ; Hammar Chiriac, 2011a , b ). Working as a group is characterized by common effort, the utilization of the group’s competence, and the presence of problem solving and reflection. According to Granström (2006) , working as a group is a more uncommon activity in an educational setting. Both approaches might be useful in different parts of group work, depending on the purpose of the group work and type of task assigned to the group ( Hammar Chiriac, 2008 ). Working in a group might lead to cooperative learning, while working as group might facilitate collaborative learning. While there are differences between the real meanings of the concepts, the terms are frequently used interchangeably ( Webb and Palincsar, 1996 ; Hammar Chiriac, 2011a , b ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ).

Previous Research of Students’ Experiences

As mentioned above, there are a limited number of studies concerning the participants’ perspectives on group work. Teachers often have to rely upon spontaneous viewpoints and indications about and students’ experiences of group work in the form of completed course evaluations. However, there are some exceptions ( Cantwell and Andrews, 2002 ; Underwood, 2003 ; Peterson and Miller, 2004 ; Hansen, 2006 ; Hammar Chiriac and Einarsson, 2007 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ). To put this study in a context and provide a rationale for the present research, a selection of studies focusing on pupils’ and/or students’ experiences and conceptions of group work will be briefly discussed below. The pupils’ and/or students inside knowledge group work may present information relevant in all levels of educational systems.

Hansen (2006) conducted a small study with 34 participating students at a business faculty, focusing on the participants’ experiences of group work. In the study different aspects of students’ positive experiences of group work were identified. For example, it was found to be necessary that all group members take part and make an effort to take part in the group work, clear goals are set for the work, role differentiation exists among members, the task has some level of relevance, and there is clear leadership. Even though Hansen’s (2006) study was conducted in higher education, these findings may be relevant in other levels in educational systems.

To gain more knowledge and understand about the essence behind high-quality group work, Hammar Chiriac and Einarsson (2007) turned their focus toward students’ experiences and conceptions of group work in higher education. A primary aim was to give university students a voice in the matter by elucidating their students’ points of view and how the students assess working in groups. Do the students’ appreciate group projects or do they find it boring and even as a waste of time? Would some students prefer to work individually, or even in “the other group?” The study was a part of a larger research project on group work in education and only a small part of the data corpus was analyzed. Different critical aspects were identified as important incitements for whether the group work turned out to be a success or a failure. The students’ positive, as well as negative, experiences of group work include both task-related (e.g., learning, group composition, participants’ contribution, time) and socio-emotional (e.g., affiliation, conflict, group climate) aspects of group work. The students described their own group, as well as other groups, in a realistic way and did not believe that the grass was greener in the other group. The same data corpus is used in this article (see under Section The Previous Analysis). According to Underwood (2003) and Peterson and Miller (2004) , the students’ enthusiasm for group work is affected by type of task, as well as the group’s members. One problem that recurred frequently concerned students who did not contribute to the group work, also known as so-called free-riders ( Hammar Chiriac and Hempel, 2013 ). Students are, in general, reluctant to punish free-riders and antipathy toward working in groups is often associated with a previous experience of having free-riders in the group ( Peterson and Miller, 2004 ). To accomplish a favorable attitude toward group work, the advantages of collaborative activities as a means for learning must be elucidated. Furthermore, students must be granted a guarantee that free-riders will not bring the group in an unfavorable light. The free-riders, on the other hand, must be encouraged to participate in the common project.

Hammar Chiriac and Granström (2012) were also interested in students’ experiences and conceptions of high-quality and low-quality group work in school and how students aged 13–16 describe good and bad group work? Hammar Chiriac and Granström (2012) show that the students seem to have a clear conception of what constitutes group work and what does not. According to the students, genuine group work is characterized by collaboration on an assignment given by the teacher. They describe group work as working together with their classmates on a common task. The students are also fully aware that successful group work calls for members with appropriate skills that are focused on the task and for all members take part in the common work. Furthermore, the results disclose what students consider being important requisites for successful versus more futile group work. The students’ inside knowledge about classroom activities ended up in a taxonomy of crucial conditions for high-quality group work. The six conditions were: (a) organization of group work conditions, (b) mode of working in groups, (c) tasks given in group work, (d) reporting group work, (e) assessment of group work, and (f) the role of the teacher in group work. The most essential condition for the students seemed to be group composition and the participants’ responsibilities and contributions. According to the students, a well-organized group consists of approximately three members, which allows the group to not be too heterogeneous. Members should be allotted a reasonable amount of time and be provided with an environment that is not too noisy. Hence, all six aspects are related to the role of the teacher’s leadership since the first five points concern the framework and prerequisites created by the teacher.

Näslund (2013) summarized students’ and researchers’ joint knowledge based on experience and research on in the context of shared perspective for group work. As a result, Näslund noticed a joint apprehension concerning what constitutes “an ideal group work.” Näslund (2013) highlighted the fact that both students and researchers emphasized for ideal group work to occur, the following conditions were important to have: (a) the group work is carried out in supportive context, (b) cooperation occurs, (c) the group work is well-structured, (d) students come prepared and act as working members during the meetings, and (e) group members show respect for each other.

From this brief exposition of a selection of research focusing on students’ views on group work, it is obvious that more systematic studies or documentations on students’ conceptions and experiences of group work within higher education are relevant and desired. The present study, which is a reanalysis of a corpus of data addressing the students’ perspective of group, is a step in that direction.

Aim of the Study

The overarching knowledge interest of this study is to enhance the body of knowledge regarding group work in higher education. The aim of this article is to add knowledge and understanding of what the essence behind successful group work in higher education is by focusing on the students’ experiences and conceptions of group work and learning in groups , an almost non-existing aspect of research on group work until the beginning of the 21st century. A primary aim is to give university students a voice in the matter by elucidating the students’ positive and negative points of view and how the students assess learning when working in groups. Furthermore, the students’ explanations of why some group work results in positive experiences and learning, while in other cases, the result is the opposite, are of interest.

Materials and Methods

To capture university students’ experiences and conceptions of group work, an inductive qualitative approach, which emphasizes content and meaning rather than quantification, was used ( Breakwell et al., 2006 ; Bryman, 2012 ). The empirical data were collected through a study-specific, semi-structured questionnaire and a qualitative content analysis was performed ( Mayring, 2000 ; Graneheim and Lundman, 2003 ; Elo and Kyngäs, 2007 ).

Participants

All participating students attended traditional university programs where group work was a central and frequently used pedagogical method in the educational design. In addition, the participants’ programs allowed the students to be allocated to the same groups for a longer period of time, in some cases during a whole semester. University programs using specific pedagogical approaches, such as problem-based learning or case method, were not included in this study.

The participants consisted of a total of 210 students, 172 female and 38 male, from two universities in two different cities (approximately division: 75 and 25%). The students came from six different populations in four university programs: (a) The Psychologist Program/Master of Science in Psychology, (b) The Human Resource Management and Work Sciences Program, (c) Social Work Program, and (d) The Bachelor’s Programs in Biology. The informants were studying in their first through eighth terms, but the majority had previous experiences from working in other group settings. Only 2% of the students had just started their first term when the study was conducted, while the vast majority (96%) was participating in university studies in their second to sixth semester.

The teacher most frequently arranged the group composition and only a few students stated that they have had any influence on the group formation. There were, with a few exceptions, between 6 and 10 groups in each of the programs included in this study. The groups consisted of between four to eight members and the differences in sizes were almost proportionally distributed among the research group. The groups were foremost heterogeneous concerning gender, but irrespective of group size, there seems to have been a bias toward more women than men in most of the groups. When there was an underrepresented sex in the group, the minority mostly included two students of the same gender. More than 50% of the students answered that in this particularly group, they worked solely with new group members, i.e., students they had not worked with in previous group work during the program.

To collect data about students’ experiences and conceptions of group work, a study-specific, semi-structured questionnaire was constructed. The questionnaire approached the students’ experiences regarding the specific group work they were working in at the time of the data collection (spring 2006), not their experiences of group work in general. The questionnaire contained a total of 18 questions, including both multiple choice and open-ended questions. The multiple choice questions concerned background variables and information about the present group. The seven open-ended questions were designed to gather data about the students’ experiences and perceptions of group work in higher education. The questionnaires were distributed to the different populations of students (some populations studied at the same program) at two universities in Sweden. During the time the questionnaires were completed, the researcher or an assistant was present to answer possible questions. In all, 210 students answered the questionnaire.

The previous analysis

As described above (Section Previous Research of Students’ Experiences) a previous analysis based on the same data corpus revealed that most of the students included in the study found group work to be an enjoyable and stimulating working method ( Hammar Chiriac and Einarsson, 2007 ). The data were analyzed using a qualitative content analysis based on three different research questions. There were two main criticisms of the previous study presented from other researchers. The criticism conveyed applied mostly to the question of whether we could assemble these groups into a joint research group and second to the fact that the results were mostly descriptive. To counter this criticism and to elaborate on the analysis, a further analysis was conducted.

The present analysis

The present analysis (or reanalysis) was conducted by using an inductive qualitative content analysis based on three open-ended research questions:

(1) In what ways does group work contribute to your learning?

(2) What positive experiences have you had while working in your present group?

(3) What negative experiences have you had while working in your present group?

Each question corresponds to one aspect of the research’s objective, but together, they might support and enrich each other and unravel new information based on the students’ experiences and conceptions of group work. Research question 1, listed above, was not included in the first analysis and is being investigated for the first time in this study, while the other two questions are being reanalyzed. An inductive, qualitative content analysis is applicable when the aim of the research is a description of the meaning or of a phenomenon in conceptual form ( Mayring, 2000 ; Graneheim and Lundman, 2003 ; Elo and Kyngäs, 2007 ).

The analysis was carried out over several steps, following the basic principles of an inductive, qualitative content analysis ( Mayring, 2000 ; Graneheim and Lundman, 2003 ; Elo and Kyngäs, 2007 ). The steps included three phases: preparation, organizing, and reporting ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2007 ). Each question was treated as a unit of analysis and was thus analyzed separately. In the preparation phase, the researcher tried to make sense of the data by becoming familiar with the data corpus. In the current study, this included transcription and thorough reading of the answers. An open coding system composed of marginal notes and headings began the second phase, which included organizing the data. This second phase, in turn, included open coding, creating categories, and abstraction. The notes and the headings from the open coding were transferred to coding sheets and then grouped into categories. Categories were formed through the interpretation of the codes that described the same meaning or phenomenon. Finally, an abstraction process began, where a general description of the grouped categories formed an abstraction (see Table 1 ). An abstraction was denominated using the content-characteristic words for this paper: learning, study-social function, and organization . The third phase, reporting , addressed the presentation of the process of analysis and the results.

TABLE 1. Examples from the organization phase of the coding process.

The final aim of this study is to present the phenomenon studied in a model or conceptual map of the categories ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2007 ). In following these procedures, we aim to expand our understanding of the existing work and to counter the second part of the criticisms, which included criticisms stating that the results were mostly descriptive in nature. To counter the criticisms regarding the question of whether we could assemble these groups into a joint research group, the qualitative abstraction that emerged from the qualitative content analysis was compared to background information by using SPSS. Three background variables were used: gender, cities, and programs.

Ethics and Quality

The ethical principles provided by the British Psychology Society have formed a guideline [ British Psychology Society (BPS), 2006 ] for the present study. The ethical principles, which emphasize the concern for participants’ interest, have been applied throughout the study [ American Psychological Association (APA), 2002 ; British Psychology Society (BPS), 2004 ; Barett, 2007 ]. To facilitate trustworthiness, a thorough description of the analysis process has been presented ( Graneheim and Lundman, 2003 ; Elo and Kyngäs, 2007 ). Translated citations are also included to increase trustworthiness.

As described above, the analysis resulted in three abstraction emerging: learning, study-social function , and organization . Each abstraction includes both a positive variant (i.e., facilitating learning, study-social function, and/or organization) as well as a negative alternative (i.e., hampering learning, study-social function, and/or organization). The results will be presented in three different sections, with each section corresponding to one abstraction. However, we would like to call attention to the fact that one fifth (20%, including missing value 8%) of the students included in this study did not perceive and/or mention any negative experiences at all in their present group. From a general point of view, there is no difference with respect to gender or city regarding the distribution of positive and negative experiences concerning the abstractions, neither concerning different programs nor the distribution of negative experiences (all p > 0.05). In contrast, there is a difference between the various programs and the distribution of positive experiences (χ 2 = 14.474; df: 6; p < 0.025). The students from the social work program display a higher amount of positive experiences in connection with a study-social function and organizing in comparison with the other programs.

The majority of the students (97%) responded that working in group somehow facilitated learning, academic knowledge, collaborative abilities or both. They learned more or different things when working in groups than they would have if working alone. By discussing and questioning each other’s points of view and listening to their fellow students’ contributions, thus obtaining different perspectives, the participants experienced an enhanced academic learning, compared to working alone. “I learn much more by working in groups than working individually. I obtain more through interaction with the other group members.” Academic knowledge is not the only type of knowledge learned through group work. In addition to academic knowledge, students also gain advanced knowledge about how groups work, how the students function as individual members of groups and how other members behave and work in groups. Some of the respondents also argued that group work in group courses strengthen the combination between empirical and theoretical learning, thus learning about groups by working in groups. “Through practical knowledge demonstrate several of the phenomena we read about in theory (group psychology and sociology).”

The results show no difference when considering either gender or city. However, when comparing the four programs included in the study and the types of learning, a difference occurs (χ 2 = 14.474; df: 6; p < 0.025). A division into two parts seems to generate the difference. On the one hand, the students from the Bachelor’s Program in Biology and the students from the Human Resource Management and Work Sciences Program emphasize academic knowledge. On the other hand, students from the Psychologist Program/Master of Science in Psychology and Social Work Program more often mentioned learning collaborative abilities single handed, as well as a combination of academic knowledge and group learning.

Even though the participants did not expressly report that group work hampered learning, they often mentioned that they perceived group work as being ineffective due to loss of focus and the presence of conflicts, thereby hampering conceivable learning. One respondent stated, “that you sometimes are out of focus in the discussion and get side-tracked instead of considering the task.” Another offered the following perspective: “Occasionally, it is too little task related and feels unnecessary sometimes. Individual work is, in certain situations, preferable.” Group work might be perceived as ineffective and time consuming considering long working periods with tedious discussions. One participant stated, “The time aspect, everything is time consuming.” The absence or presence of conflicts in the group affects students’ experiences, and conflicts not handled may influence learning in a negative way. The students perceived that it was difficult to come to an agreement and experience those conflicts and the need to compromise hampered individual learning. Accordingly, the absence of conflicts seemed to be an important incitement for learning. However, fear of conflicts can lead to reduced learning and cause negative experiences, but to a considerably lesser extent than does the presence of actual conflicts. “A great fear of conflicts sometimes raises an oppressive atmosphere.” “Fear of conflicts leads to much not made known.”

A Study-Social Function

Group work also has an important study - social function according to the students. They describe their membership in groups as an important aspect of affiliation. In general, the total number of students at a program is approximately 60–80 or more. In contexts with a large population of students, the smaller group gives the participants an opportunity to feel affiliated with the group and to each other. “Feels safe to have a certain group to prepare oneself together with before, for instance, an upcoming seminar.” The group gives the individual student a platform of belonging, which might serve as an important arena for learning ( facilitate ) and finding friends to spend leisure time with. Many of the participants also reported feeling a positive atmosphere in the group, which is important for the satisfaction of being in the group together with the fellow students.

To be a member of a group may also serve as a function of relief, both academically and socially, for the individual student. The participants reported that many of the tasks assigned by the university teachers are difficult to handle on their own. “The others explain to me. We help one another.” However, the students reported that they helped and supported each other, even if the task did not demand cooperation. “As a student, you get more active. You help one another to extract the groups’ common knowledge. Forward info if somebody is missing.” Being a member of a group also affects students’ motivation to study. They prepare themselves by reading texts and other material before the next group session. Group work may also have positive effects on achievement. Students’ total amount of time and effort on their work may also increase. Through group work, the participants also get confirmation of who they are and what their capacities are.

Being a member of a group also has its downside, which often has to do with the group climate and/or group processes, both of which have multiple and complex features. Many students reported that both the group climate and group processes might be the source of negative conceptions of the group and hamper learning. “Process losses.” The respondents described negative conceptions based on the feeling of not having enough time to get to know each other in the group or being in situations where no cooperation occurred. Other students referred to the fact that the group’s life is too long, which may lead to group members not only wearing each other out, but also having a negative effect on each other’s mood. “Influenced by each other’s mood.” Examples of negative experiences are process losses in general, including insufficient communication, unclear roles, and problems with one group member. As mentioned above, the students from the Social Work Program display a higher number of positive experiences in connection with a study-social function and organizing in comparison with students from the other programs.

Organization

O rganization concerns the structure of group work and includes different aspects, all describing group work from different angles. The aspects are relevant no matter how the participants perceive the group work, whether as positive or negative. Unlike the other two abstractions (learning and study-social function), organization includes the same aspects no matter what the experiences are, namely group composition , group structure , way of working and contributions.

Whether the group is composed in a homogeneous or heterogeneous way seems to be experienced in both a positive and negative sense. A well-thought-out group composition , including both group size and mix of members, is essential. A just large-enough group for the task, consisting of a population of members that is not too heterogeneous, facilitates a joyful experience and learning. A homogeneous mix of members might be perceived as positive, as the students feel that they have similar life situations, opinions, and skills, thereby causing positive conditions for collaboration within the group. Conversely, in a group with a heterogeneous mix, different members contribute with different knowledge and/or prior experiences, which can be used in the group for collective and collaborative learning. “Good group composition, distribution of age groups that leads to fruitful discussions.”

An additional facilitating prerequisite is that the group develops adequate ways of working together, which includes a well-organized group structure . Well-working groups are characterized as having developed adequate ways of working together, while groups that work less well together lack a developed way of cooperation. “Well-organized working group with clear and distinct rules and structure.” Preparation and attendance for group work are aspects mentioned as facilitating (and hampering) incitements. Group work in educational settings sometimes entails that you, as a student, are forced to read and learn within a certain period of time that is beyond your control. Some participants find the pressure positive, hence “increase the pressure to read chapters in time.” The members’ contribution to the group is also a central factor for the students’ apprehension of how the group works. This is, in short, about how much each member ought to contribute to the group and to the work. Groups considered to be well-working are ones where all members contribute to the group’s work, but the content of the contribution may vary according to the single member’s qualifications. “We work well together (most of us). Everybody participates in different ways and seems committed.” “Good, everybody participates the same amount. We complement each other well.”

The same prerequisites can lead to the reverse result, i.e., hampering learning and stirring up negative experiences. If the group members are too identical (a homogeneous group composition ), it might lead to a lack of opinions, which several participants perceived as being negative. “That we do not get a male perspective about the subject. We are all girls, at the age of 20, which also means that we have pretty much the same experiences that may be seen as both positive and negative. The negative is the lack of opinion.” If the group is considered to be too small, students seems to find it troublesome, as the relationships are few, but there are also few people who are available to handle the workload allotted to the group. Nevertheless, a group that is too large could also lead to negative experiences. “It is far too large a group.”

A lack of group structure might lead to a lower degree of satisfaction with the group’s way of working . A commonly expressed point of view seen in the students’ answers involved the occurrences of when all members did not attend the meetings (absence). In these cases, it was also viewed that the work in the group often was characterized as unstructured. “Sometimes a bit unclear structures, some students have difficulties with coming in time.” Not attending or coming unprepared or badly prepared to the group work is other aspect that is commented on. “Low degree of fellowship, punctuality is a problem, an insecure group.” Some students find it frustrating to prepare for a certain time decided that is beyond their control. “A necessity to read certain chapters within a specific period of time is never stimulating.”

One characteristic of groups that are not working well is that contribution varies among the members. In group work, students with different levels of ambition are assembled, which may result in different levels of interest and commitment, as well as differences in the willingness to take on responsibilities or part of the workload of the group’s work. Some members are active and do much of the work, while others barely contribute at all. “Some don’t do anything while others pull the heaviest burden. Two out of three prepare before the meeting, the rest think that they are able to read during the group work and do not supply the group with anything else other than delays and frustration.” A common answer seen in the questionnaires that concerns negative experiences of group work as they relate to contribution is: “Everybody does not contribute just as much.” or “There is always someone who just glides along and doesn’t take part.”

Summary of the Results

The results are summarized in a model illustrating the relationship between abstractions (i.e., learning, study-social function, and organization) and result (i.e., enhanced or reduced learning), as well as positive or negative experiences (see Figure 1 ).

FIGURE 1. A model illustrating the relationship between abstractions and result .

The figure shows that all three abstractions may facilitate or hamper learning as well as the experiences of group work. To piece together, the difficult and extensive jigsaw puzzle concerning why some group work result in positive experiences and learning, while in other cases the result is the reverse is still not solved. In this article, we propose that the prerequisites learning, study-social function, and organization influence learning and experiences of working in group, thus, providing additional pieces of information to the jigsaw puzzle (Figure 2 ).

FIGURE 2. Pieces of jigsaw puzzle influence learning and experiences.

The current study focuses on university students’ experiences and conceptions of group work and learning in groups. A primary aim was to give university students a voice in the matter by elucidating the students’ positive and negative points of view, as well as how the students’ assess learning when working in groups. The analysis resulted in the emergence of three different abstractions: learning, study-social function, and organizations. Each abstraction also included a positive and a negative variant. In other words, all three abstractions either facilitated or hampered university students’ learning, as well as their experiences of group work.

Learning in Group Work

The result shows that the majority of the students (97%) experience that working in group facilitated learning, either academic knowledge, collaborative abilities or both, accordingly confirming previous research ( Johnson and Johnson, 2004 ; Baines et al., 2007 ; Gillies and Boyle, 2010 , 2011 ). According to the students, they learn more or different things when working in groups compared with working individually. Academic knowledge was not the only type of knowledge learned through group work. In addition to academic knowledge, students also gained advanced knowledge about how groups work, how the students function as individual members of groups and how other members behave and work in groups. Some of the respondents also argued that group work might strengthen the combination between empirical and theoretical learning, thus the students were learning about groups by working in groups. This implies that group work, from a learning perspective, serves several functions for the students ( Kutnick and Beredondini, 2009 ; Gillies and Boyle, 2010 , 2011 ; Hammar Chiriac, 2011a , b ). Group work also seems to have an important study-social function for the university students, hence confirming that group work serves more functions than just being a pedagogical mode.

Affiliation, fellowship, and welfare seem to be highly important, and may even be essential prerequisites for learning. Accordingly, group work functions as both as an objective (i.e., learning collaborative abilities), and as the means (i.e., a base for academic achievement), or both, for the students ( Gillies, 2003a , b ; Johnson and Johnson, 2004 ; Baines et al., 2007 ). Moreover, the students from the Bachelor’s Program in Biology and the students from the Program for Human Resources seem to use group work more as means for obtaining academic knowledge. In contrast, students from the Psychologist Program/Master of Science in Psychology and Social Work Program more often mentioned learning collaborative abilities alone, as well as a combination of academic knowledge and group learning, thus using group work as an objective, as a means, or as a combination of both. One interpretation might be that the type of task assigned to the students differs in various programs. This can be valid both concerning the purpose of group work (group work as objective or as the means), but also arrangement (working in a group or as a group; Underwood, 2003 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ). Another possible explanation might be that the main emphasis in the Bachelor’s Program in Biology and the Program for Human Resources is on product and academic knowledge, while in the Psychologist Program/Master of Science in Psychology and Social Work Program, the process is more articulated and demanded. However, this is only speculation and further research is needed.

Even though the participants did not explicitly state that group work hampered learning, they mentioned that they perceived group work to be ineffective due to the loss of focus and/or the presence of conflicts with other group members, thereby hampering conceivable learning. This may also be an effect of the purpose or arrangement of the group work ( Cantwell and Andrews, 2002 ; Underwood, 2003 ; Peterson and Miller, 2004 ; Hansen, 2006 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ; Hammar Chiriac and Hempel, 2013 ).

Experiences of Group Work

The results revealed that several aspects of group work are important incentives for learning. In addition, this study revealed students’ experiences of group work (i.e., facilitating or hampering positive/negative experiences), which is in line with the previous studies on students’ experiences of working in groups ( Cantwell and Andrews, 2002 ; Underwood, 2003 ; Peterson and Miller, 2004 ; Hansen, 2006 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ; Hammar Chiriac and Hempel, 2013 ). Group composition, group structure, ways of working, and participants’ contributions are aspects put forward by the university students as either facilitating or hampering the positive experience of group work ( Underwood, 2003 ; Peterson and Miller, 2004 ; Hansen, 2006 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ; Hammar Chiriac and Hempel, 2013 ).

Several of the aspects bear reference to whether the group members work in a group or as a group ( Underwood, 2003 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ). Working as a group is characterized by common effort, utilization of the group’s competence, and includes problem solving and reflection. All group members are involved in and working on a common task to produce a joint outcome ( Bennet and Dunne, 1992 ; Galton and Williamson, 1992 ; Webb and Palincsar, 1996 ; Hammar Chiriac, 2011a , b ). According to the results, not all groups are working as a group but rather working in a group, which, according to Granström (2006) , is common in an educational setting.

Due to problems with group composition, members’ contributions, and group structure, including rules and ways of cooperation, some students end up with negative experiences of group work. Additionally, the university students allude to the fact that a well-functioning supportive study-social context is an essential prerequisite not only for positive experiences of group work, but also for learning ( Hammar Chiriac and Hempel, 2013 ). Both working in a group and working as group might be useful in different parts of the group work ( Hammar Chiriac, 2008 ) and cause learning. Hence working in a group causes cooperative learning based on social facilitation ( Zajonc, 1980 ; Baron, 1986 ; Uziel, 2007 ) while working as group causes learning benefits through collaboration with other group members. Although both approaches might cause positive or negative experiences, a conceivable interpretation is that working as a group has a greater potential to enhance positive experiences. The findings suggest a need for further research to fully understand why some group work causes positive experiences and other instances of group work cause negative experiences.

The findings in the current study develop the findings from Hammar Chiriac and Einarsson (2007) . First, it shows that it is possible to assemble all groups in to a joint research group (see below). Second, a thorough reanalysis, using an inductive qualitative content analysis, resulted in the emergence of three different abstractions: learning, study-social function, and organizations as either facilitating or hampering learning, and experiences.

Methodological Considerations

There are some limitations in the current study and most of them have to do with the construction of the study-specific, semi-structured questionnaire. First, the questions do not discriminate between (a) the type of group work, (b) the purpose with the group work, (c) the structure of the group work (i.e., extent and/or time); or (d) ways of working in the group (i.e., cooperation or collaboration). Second, the design of the questionnaire does not facilitate comparison between the populations included in the group. The questionnaire treated group work as one activity and did not acknowledge that group work can serve different functions and include various activities ( Hammar Chiriac, 2008 ). This simplification of the phenomena group work causes criticism concerning whether or not it is possible to assemble these populations into a joint research group. An elaborated description of the analysis process and the comparison to three background variables has been used to counter this criticism. The thin results from the comparison, indicate that based on the question used in the study-specific questionnaire, it is possible to assemble the results into a corpus of joint results.

Conclusion/Concluding Remarks

The results indicate that most of the students’ experienced that group work facilitated learning, especially concerning academic knowledge. Three important prerequisites (learning, study-social function, and organization) for group work that serve as an effective pedagogy and as an incentive for learning were identified and discussed. All three abstractions either facilitated or hampered university students’ learning, as well as their experiences of group work. By listening to the university students’ voices and elucidating their experiences and conceptions, we have been able to add new knowledge and understanding of what the essence is behind successful group work in higher education. Furthermore, the students’ explanations of why some group work results in positive experiences and learning, while in other cases, the result is the opposite, can be of use for further development of group work as a pedagogical practice.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

The author acknowledges Ph.D. Faculty Program Director, Charlotta Einarsson, for her contribution to the design of this study and contribution to early stages of the data analysis and manuscript.

American Psychological Association (APA). (2002). The Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct . Available at: http://www.apa.org/ethics/code2002.html

Baines, E., Blatchford, P., and Chowne, A. (2007). Improving the effectiveness of collaborative group work in primary schools: effects on science attainment. Br. Educ. Res. J. 33, 663–680. doi: 10.1080/01411920701582231

CrossRef Full Text

Barett, M. (2007). “Practical and ethical issues in planning research,” in Research Methods in Psychology , eds G. Breakell, S. Hammond, C. Fife-Schaw, and J. A. Smith (London: Sage Publications), 24–48.

Baron, R. S. (1986). Distraction-conflict theory: progress and problems. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 19, 1–40. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60211-7

Bennet, N., and Dunne, E. (1992). Managing Classroom Groups. Hemel Hempstead: Simon & Schuster Education.

Blatchford, P., Kutnick, P., Baines, E., and Galton, M. (2003). Toward a social pedagogy of classroom group work. Int. J. Educ. Res. 39, 153–172. doi: 10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00078-8

Breakwell, G. M., and Hammond, F., Fife-Schaw, C., and Smith, J. A. (eds). (2006). Research Methods in Psychology . London: Sage Publications.

British Psychology Society (BPS). (2004). Code of Conduct, Ethical Principles, and Guidelines . Available at: http://www.bps.org.uk/document-download-area/document-download.cfm?file_uuid=6D0645CC-7E96-C67F-D75E2648E5580115&ext=pdf

British Psychology Society (BPS). (2006). Code of Ethics and Conduct . Available at: http://www.bps.org.uk/the-society/code-of-conduct/code-of-conduct_home.cfm

Bryman, A. (2012). Social Research Methods . Oxford: University Press.

Cantwell, R. H., and Andrews, B. (2002). Cognitive and psychological factors underlying secondary school students’ feeling towards group work. Educ. Psychol. 22, 75–91. doi: 10.1080/01443410120101260

Elo, S., and Kyngäs, H. (2007). The qualitative content analysis process. J. Adv. Nurs. 62, 107–115. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text

Galton, M., and Williamson, J. (1992). Group Work in the Primary Classroom . London: Routledge.

Galton, M. J., Hargreaves, L., and Pell, T. (2009). Group work and whole-class teaching with 11–14-years-old compared. Cambridge J. Educ . 39, 119–147. doi: 10.1080/03057640802701994

Gillies, R. M. (2003a). The behaviours, interactions, and perceptions of junior high school students during small-group learning. J. Educ. Psychol. 95, 137–147. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.137

Gillies, R. M. (2003b). Structuring cooperative group work in classrooms. Int. J. Educ. Res. 39, 35–49. doi: 10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00072-7

Gillies, R. M., and Boyle, M. (2010). Teachers’ reflections on cooperative learning: Issues of implementation. Teach. Teach. Educ. 26, 933–940. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.034

Gillies, R. M., and Boyle, M. (2011). Teachers’ reflections on cooperative learning (CL): a two-year follow-up. Teach. Educ. 1, 63–78. doi: 10.1080/10476210.2010.538045

Graneheim, U. H., and Lundman, B. (2003). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ. Today 24, 105–112. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001

Granström, K. (2006). “Group phenomena and classroom management in Sweden,” in Handbook of Classroom Management: Research, Practice, and Contemporary Issues , eds C. M. Evertson and C. S. Weinstein (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum), 1141–1160.

Hammar Chiriac, E. (2008). A scheme for understanding group processes in problem-based learning. High. Educ. 55, 505–518. doi: 10.1007/s10734-007-9071-7

Hammar Chiriac, E. (2010). “Group work is not one, but a great many processes – understanding group work dynamics,” in Group Theory: Classes, Representation and Connections, and Applications , ed. C. W. Danellis (New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.), 153–166.

Hammar Chiriac, E. (2011a). Research on Group Work in Education . New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Hammar Chiriac, E. (2011b). “Research on group work in education,” in Emerging Issues in Compulsory Education [Progress in Education. Volume 20 ], ed R. Nata (New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.), 25–44.

Hammar Chiriac, E., and Einarsson, C. (2007). “Is the grass greener in the other group? Students’ experiences of group-work” [“Är gräset grönare i den andra gruppen? Studenters erfarenheter av grupparbete”] [Published in Swedish], in Interaction on the Edge 2. Proceedings from the 5th GRASP Conference , ed. J. Näslund (Linköping: Linköping University).

Hammar Chiriac, E., and Granström, K. (2012). Teachers’ leadership and students’ experience of group work. Teach. Teach. Theor. Pract. 3, 345–363. doi: 10.1080/13540602.2012.629842

Hammar Chiriac, E., and Hempel, A. (2013), Handbook for Group Work [Published in Swedish: Handbok för grupparbete – att skapa fungerande grupper i undervisningen] . Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Hansen, R. S. (2006). Benefits and problems with student teams: suggestions for improving team projects. J. Educ. Bus. 82, 11–19. doi: 10.3200/JOEB.82.1.11-19

Johnson, D. W., and Johnson, R. T. (1975). Learning Together and Alone. Cooperative, Competitive and Individualistic Learning (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall).

Johnson, D. W., and Johnson, R. T. (2004). Assessing Students in Groups: Promoting Group Responsibility and Individual Accountability . Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Kutnick, P., and Beredondini, L. (2009). Can the enhancement of group work in classrooms provide a basis for effective communication in support of school-based cognitive achievement in classrooms of young learners? Cambridge J. Educ . 39, 71–94. doi: 10.1080/03057640902836880

Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., Spence, J. C., Poulsen, C., Chambers, B., and d’Apllonia, S. (1996). Within-class grouping: a meta analysis. Rev. Educ. Res. 66, 423–458. doi: 10.3102/00346543066004423

Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative Content Analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social Research 1:2. Available at: http://qualitative-research.net/fqs/fqs-e/2-00inhalt-e.htm_140309

Näslund, J. (2013). “Pupils’ and students’ view on group work” [Published in Swedish: Elevers och studenters syn på grupparbete] in Handbook for Group Work [Published in Swedish: Handbok för grupparbete – att skapa fungerande grupper i undervisningen] , eds E. Hammar Chiriac and A. Hempel (Lund: Studentlitteratur), 233–242.

Peterson, S, and Miller, J. A. (2004). Quality of college students’ experiences during cooperative learning. Soc. Psychol. Learn. 7, 161–183.

Underwood, J. D. M. (2003). Student attitudes towards socially acceptable and unacceptable group working practices. Br. J. Psychol. 94, 319–337. doi: 10.1348/000712603767876253

Uziel, L. (2007). Individual differences in the social facilitation effect: a review and meta-analysis. J. Res. Person. 41, 579–601. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2006.06.008

Webb, N. M., and Palincsar, A. S. (1996). “Group processes in the classroom,” in Handbook of Educational Psychology , eds D. C. Berliner and R. C. Calfee (New York: Macmillan), 841–873.

Zajonc, R. B. (1980). “Compresence,” in Psychology of Group Influence , ed. P. B. Paulus (New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum), 35–60.

Keywords : group work, collaborative learning, cooperative learning, higher education, students’ perspectives, qualitative research

Citation: Hammar Chiriac E (2014) Group work as an incentive for learning – students’ experiences of group work. Front. Psychol. 5 :558. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00558

Received: 30 Mar 2014; Accepted: 20 May 2014; Published online: 05 June 2014.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2014 Hammar Chiriac. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Eva Hammar Chiriac, Division of Psychology, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, SE-581 83 Linköping, Sweden e-mail: [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Corpus ID: 149756364

The Benefits of Group work

• Lynda Badache Lynda Badache
• Published 1 June 2011

11 Citations

The effect of group work on improving student's motivation to learn chemistry: an action research.

• Highly Influenced

DISCUSSION AS AN ACTIVE LEARNING IN EFL

Effect of group work on efl students' attitudes and learning in higher education., what shapes students' perceptions of group work: personality or past experience, the competency-based approach: the concept of group in benin efl teaching, adapt and thrive: student engagement on a business and economics foundation year programme during covid-19, senior high school chemistry teachers’ knowledge and use of group work as a teaching strategy, relationship between students’ perception of quality of instructional resources used in teacher education programmes and their attitude towards active participation in learning activities in the universities in nakuru county, kenya, comprehensive scrutiny on the concept of group work for english language teaching, medical students’ perceptions towards research at a sudanese university, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

• Career Advice

It’s Good Till It’s Not

By  Margaret Finnegan

You have / 5 articles left. Sign up for a free account or log in.

iStock/Jacob Ammentorp Lund

“It was good until it wasn’t,” he said. A veteran, he was older than my typical undergraduates, and he spoke openly, though vaguely, about the traumatic brain injury that earned him classroom accommodations.

He tapped his fingers against his jeans. “My group ignores me. I’m too stressed. It’s triggering my PTSD and making me sick. Can I just work on my own?”

Two ironies struck me. One, I had turned to collaborative learning in order to harness the power of social dynamics and Universal Design for Learning (which focuses on making instruction more inclusive and accessible). I had hoped my group project would keep students engaged and thinking and that it might let them showcase their distinct skill sets.

The second irony was that, during this time, my college-age daughter was surviving her own group-work disaster. She has autism and she was taking a math class with a professor celebrated for his commitment to active learning. The class relied on in-class group work, which meant that, in addition to trying to master the math, she had to navigate the social minefield of working with neurotypical peers in a crowded, fast-paced, loud classroom. It proved disastrous.

Both cases made me wonder: Does group work really help all students? Are some students -- particularly neurodivergent students -- ill served by the turn to group work and learning activities that demand strong social skills?

In puzzling through this problem, I went deep into the research on team-based learning, but I could find no research focused specifically on group work and neurodivergent college students. Indeed, research on student teams tends to suggest that students are pretty interchangeable except for two assumptions: some students are freeloaders. They lack initiative and avoid work. Other students are lone wolves. They are so highly individualistic that they resist collaboration. To embrace such stereotypes, however, is to embrace the idea that groups have problems because particular group members are personally defective. In fact, problems with groups are usually social in nature and stem from lived social dynamics and histories.

This doesn’t mean all group members are perfect or have the best of intentions. It does mean that there are concrete reasons people act the way they do. Work by Curt J. Dommeyer , for example, found that perceived freeloaders often have “unique characteristics” (including “language barriers, cultural differences, learning differences, physical or mental problems, personality traits, and time constraints”) that make it difficult for them to contribute to group projects as much as their peers.

My daughter didn’t mean for her autism-related challenges to make her less productive than her other group members, but they did. She wasn’t freeloading. She was working in a classroom -- in a system -- that does not provide appropriate accommodations for neurodiverse students. Conversely, other work has found that so-called lone wolves don’t believe that they can depend on people. Why would they think that? Because they have learned that they cannot depend on people. My student turned lone wolf because his group ignored him with the most benign of excuses -- they were already friends, it was easier for them to get together alone -- and that made him feel discounted. No wonder he wanted to jettison his peers.

But the two students who excluded my disabled student were also pretty high achieving. Without them saying so, I could tell they thought my student with the brain injury might hold them back. According to Thanh Pham and Thi Hong , that isn’t unusual. It isn’t even unwarranted. In semistructured interviews with high school students, Caroline Koh and other researchers found that teachers often assumed students were “master planners” who naturally knew how to delegate and break large tasks into manageable, sequenced steps. But “low-ability” students in particular often lacked the executive-function skills to do these things. As a result, they stopped showing up to class or demonstrated little interest in the project. On the surface, they seemed like classic freeloaders. Clearly, however, what they lacked was scaffolding. Still, for the students paired with such peers, the reasons for underperformance don’t really matter. What matters to them is a sense of equity and accountability.

Nonetheless, it is the underperforming students I worry about. Whatever stew of social and cultural experiences or linguistic, economic or neural realities have reduced them to group-work piranhas, they have the most to lose in the turn toward collaborative learning. They feel flustered. They feel disrespected. They feel silenced. Brought together in a group, they feel alone and alienated. And vast research shows that the more alienated students feel, the worse their achievement and the more likely that they will drop out.

Making Teams Work

Some faculty members might dismiss my complaints. Particularly, colleagues at elite institutions may feel like research separating low- and high-achieving college students does not speak to them. But ability is relative. There are shrinking violets and dominating personalities at every college and university -- and unless students find a way to come together, group work will not harness the power of social learning but instead reify social hierarchies.

So how can we make teams work so that everyone benefits?

First, if group projects are to be considered important outputs, then training students to work in teams needs to be an important and measurable learning objective. The process of learning to function in a group has to be as important as the product. And that means students need to learn how to identify and delegate team roles, how to set short- and long-term goals, how to plan backward, and -- most importantly -- how to communicate.

In a study on social loafing in student groups, Chris Lam found that more than 50 percent of freeloading problems could be explained by the quality of communication in student groups. But how often are groups taught to communicate? (And no, advising students to exchange contact information doesn’t count.) In particular, students have to be taught to manage conflict. As far back as 1963, Bruce Tuckerman acknowledged that conflict -- what he called storming -- was a natural part of learning how to be a group. But if students don’t learn to confront conflict -- if they only try to avoid it -- they will never reap the cognitive benefits of functioning collaboratively.

Second, the process of learning how to be a team requires time. It has to start early in the semester with faculty members providing students time in class to perform low-stakes group tasks, try out different team roles, deal with minor conflicts and pull faculty over when they need support.

Time is especially important if we want groups to benefit from the power of diversity. Here’s the good news: diversity can add an amazing dynamic to groups. Diversity adds messages of equality and facilitates interaction and understanding. More than that, diverse groups are just better. Research shows that when it comes to ethnicity, diverse groups outperform homogenous groups .

But that, too, takes time. For example, a study of culturally mixed groups on international campuses found that homogenous groups outperformed mixed groups in the short run, but by the end of the semester, the mixed groups had gained the edge. Intercultural collaboration led to greater innovation and creativity. We need to extend how we think about diversity, however, and help students see how all kinds of differences can add to what we know and think.

Third, learning to work in a group means learning to trust a process, and students need to know that they will benefit from the process -- even when that process seems to be leading them to doom. We learn from conflict. We learn from failure. That’s why learning to work in a group also means that students need to learn how to reflect on their own strengths and weaknesses as team members. Instead of focusing on what other team members are doing right or wrong, students need to see how they are personally growing .

Journals, knowledge surveys and personal narrative writing are all tools that help students self-reflect. When students can learn to value what they are personally getting from the arduous process of working in a group, they can worry less about whether other people in the group are pulling them up or down.

I wish I had known this when my own student was struggling. I didn’t. So I told him he could do his own thing. Doing so, I taught him not to grow, not to communicate, but to avoid -- to be a lone wolf. I taught his group members the same thing. Worse, I confirmed their suspicions that struggling students have little to offer.

But with the majority of organizations committing to some sort of team-based structure, none of us can afford to blow it when it comes to having students work collaboratively. The work we do in the classroom sets up ways of thinking that students take with them in the world. If we care about equity and diversity, then giving students the skills to function and grow as group members is a good place to start.

The Imperfect Tutor: Grading, Feedback and AI

Patricia Taylor has found using AI takes more time and creates more problems than not if instructors want students to

Share This Article

More from career advice.

How to Mitigate Bias and Hire the Best People

Patrick Arens shares an approach to reviewing candidates that helps you select those most suited to do the job rather

The Warning Signs of Academic Layoffs

Ryan Anderson advises on how to tell if your institution is gearing up for them and how you can prepare and protect y

Legislation Isn’t All That Negatively Impacts DEI Practitioners

Many experience incivility, bullying, belittling and a disregard for their views and feelings on their own campuses,

• Become a Member
• Sign up for Newsletters
• Learning & Assessment
• Diversity & Equity
• Career Development
• Labor & Unionization
• Shared Governance
• Academic Freedom
• Books & Publishing
• Financial Aid
• Residential Life
• Free Speech
• Physical & Mental Health
• Race & Ethnicity
• Sex & Gender
• Socioeconomics
• Traditional-Age
• Adult & Post-Traditional
• Teaching & Learning
• Artificial Intelligence
• Digital Publishing
• Data Analytics
• Administrative Tech
• Alternative Credentials
• Financial Health
• Cost-Cutting
• Revenue Strategies
• Academic Programs
• Physical Campuses
• Mergers & Collaboration
• Fundraising
• Research Universities
• Regional Public Universities
• Community Colleges
• Private Nonprofit Colleges
• Minority-Serving Institutions
• Religious Colleges
• Women's Colleges
• Specialized Colleges
• For-Profit Colleges
• Executive Leadership
• Trustees & Regents
• State Oversight
• Accreditation
• Politics & Elections
• Supreme Court
• Student Aid Policy
• Science & Research Policy
• State Policy
• Colleges & Localities
• Employee Satisfaction
• Remote & Flexible Work
• Staff Issues
• Study Abroad
• International Students in U.S.
• U.S. Colleges in the World
• Intellectual Affairs
• Seeking a Faculty Job
• Advancing in the Faculty
• Seeking an Administrative Job
• Advancing as an Administrator
• Beyond Transfer
• Call to Action
• Confessions of a Community College Dean
• Higher Ed Gamma
• Higher Ed Policy
• Just Explain It to Me!
• Just Visiting
• Law, Policy—and IT?
• Leadership & StratEDgy
• Leadership in Higher Education
• Learning Innovation
• Online: Trending Now
• Resident Scholar
• University of Venus
• Student Voice
• Academic Life
• Health & Wellness
• The College Experience
• Life After College
• Academic Minute
• Weekly Wisdom
• Reports & Data
• Quick Takes
• Advertising & Marketing
• Consulting Services
• Data & Insights
• Hiring & Jobs
• Event Partnerships

4 /5 Articles remaining this month.

Sign up for a free account or log in.

• Sign Up, It’s FREE

Center for Teaching

Group work: using cooperative learning groups effectively.

Many instructors from disciplines across the university use group work to enhance their students’ learning. Whether the goal is to increase student understanding of content, to build particular transferable skills, or some combination of the two, instructors often turn to small group work to capitalize on the benefits of peer-to-peer instruction. This type of group work is formally termed cooperative learning, and is defined as the instructional use of small groups to promote students working together to maximize their own and each other’s learning (Johnson, et al., 2008).

Cooperative learning is characterized by positive interdependence, where students perceive that better performance by individuals produces better performance by the entire group (Johnson, et al., 2014). It can be formal or informal, but often involves specific instructor intervention to maximize student interaction and learning. It is infinitely adaptable, working in small and large classes and across disciplines, and can be one of the most effective teaching approaches available to college instructors.

What can it look like?

What’s the theoretical underpinning, is there evidence that it works.

• What are approaches that can help make it effective?

Informal cooperative learning groups In informal cooperative learning, small, temporary, ad-hoc groups of two to four students work together for brief periods in a class, typically up to one class period, to answer questions or respond to prompts posed by the instructor.

Additional examples of ways to structure informal group work

Think-pair-share

The instructor asks a discussion question. Students are instructed to think or write about an answer to the question before turning to a peer to discuss their responses. Groups then share their responses with the class.

Peer Instruction

This modification of the think-pair-share involves personal responses devices (e.g. clickers). The question posted is typically a conceptually based multiple-choice question. Students think about their answer and vote on a response before turning to a neighbor to discuss. Students can change their answers after discussion, and “sharing” is accomplished by the instructor revealing the graph of student response and using this as a stimulus for large class discussion. This approach is particularly well-adapted for large classes.

In this approach, groups of students work in a team of four to become experts on one segment of new material, while other “expert teams” in the class work on other segments of new material. The class then rearranges, forming new groups that have one member from each expert team. The members of the new team then take turns teaching each other the material on which they are experts.

Formal cooperative learning groups

In formal cooperative learning students work together for one or more class periods to complete a joint task or assignment (Johnson et al., 2014). There are several features that can help these groups work well:

• The instructor defines the learning objectives for the activity and assigns students to groups.
• The groups are typically heterogeneous, with particular attention to the skills that are needed for success in the task.
• Within the groups, students may be assigned specific roles, with the instructor communicating the criteria for success and the types of social skills that will be needed.
• Importantly, the instructor continues to play an active role during the groups’ work, monitoring the work and evaluating group and individual performance.
• Instructors also encourage groups to reflect on their interactions to identify potential improvements for future group work.

This video shows an example of formal cooperative learning groups in David Matthes’ class at the University of Minnesota:

There are many more specific types of group work that fall under the general descriptions given here, including team-based learning , problem-based learning , and process-oriented guided inquiry learning .

The use of cooperative learning groups in instruction is based on the principle of constructivism, with particular attention to the contribution that social interaction can make. In essence, constructivism rests on the idea that individuals learn through building their own knowledge, connecting new ideas and experiences to existing knowledge and experiences to form new or enhanced understanding (Bransford, et al., 1999). The consideration of the role that groups can play in this process is based in social interdependence theory, which grew out of Kurt Koffka’s and Kurt Lewin’s identification of groups as dynamic entities that could exhibit varied interdependence among members, with group members motivated to achieve common goals. Morton Deutsch conceptualized varied types of interdependence, with positive correlation among group members’ goal achievements promoting cooperation.

Lev Vygotsky extended this work by examining the relationship between cognitive processes and social activities, developing the sociocultural theory of development. The sociocultural theory of development suggests that learning takes place when students solve problems beyond their current developmental level with the support of their instructor or their peers. Thus both the idea of a zone of proximal development, supported by positive group interdependence, is the basis of cooperative learning (Davidson and Major, 2014; Johnson, et al., 2014).

Cooperative learning follows this idea as groups work together to learn or solve a problem, with each individual responsible for understanding all aspects. The small groups are essential to this process because students are able to both be heard and to hear their peers, while in a traditional classroom setting students may spend more time listening to what the instructor says.

Cooperative learning uses both goal interdependence and resource interdependence to ensure interaction and communication among group members. Changing the role of the instructor from lecturing to facilitating the groups helps foster this social environment for students to learn through interaction.

David Johnson, Roger Johnson, and Karl Smith performed a meta-analysis of 168 studies comparing cooperative learning to competitive learning and individualistic learning in college students (Johnson et al., 2006). They found that cooperative learning produced greater academic achievement than both competitive learning and individualistic learning across the studies, exhibiting a mean weighted effect size of 0.54 when comparing cooperation and competition and 0.51 when comparing cooperation and individualistic learning. In essence, these results indicate that cooperative learning increases student academic performance by approximately one-half of a standard deviation when compared to non-cooperative learning models, an effect that is considered moderate. Importantly, the academic achievement measures were defined in each study, and ranged from lower-level cognitive tasks (e.g., knowledge acquisition and retention) to higher level cognitive activity (e.g., creative problem solving), and from verbal tasks to mathematical tasks to procedural tasks. The meta-analysis also showed substantial effects on other metrics, including self-esteem and positive attitudes about learning. George Kuh and colleagues also conclude that cooperative group learning promotes student engagement and academic performance (Kuh et al., 2007).

Springer, Stanne, and Donovan (1999) confirmed these results in their meta-analysis of 39 studies in university STEM classrooms. They found that students who participated in various types of small-group learning, ranging from extended formal interactions to brief informal interactions, had greater academic achievement, exhibited more favorable attitudes towards learning, and had increased persistence through STEM courses than students who did not participate in STEM small-group learning.

The box below summarizes three individual studies examining the effects of cooperative learning groups.

What are approaches that can help make group work effective?

Preparation

Articulate your goals for the group work, including both the academic objectives you want the students to achieve and the social skills you want them to develop.

Determine the group conformation that will help meet your goals.

• In informal group learning, groups often form ad hoc from near neighbors in a class.
• In formal group learning, it is helpful for the instructor to form groups that are heterogeneous with regard to particular skills or abilities relevant to group tasks. For example, groups may be heterogeneous with regard to academic skill in the discipline or with regard to other skills related to the group task (e.g., design capabilities, programming skills, writing skills, organizational skills) (Johnson et al, 2006).
• Groups from 2-6 are generally recommended, with groups that consist of three members exhibiting the best performance in some problem-solving tasks (Johnson et al., 2006; Heller and Hollabaugh, 1992).
• To avoid common problems in group work, such as dominance by a single student or conflict avoidance, it can be useful to assign roles to group members (e.g., manager, skeptic, educator, conciliator) and to rotate them on a regular basis (Heller and Hollabaugh, 1992). Assigning these roles is not necessary in well-functioning groups, but can be useful for students who are unfamiliar with or unskilled at group work.

Choose an assessment method that will promote positive group interdependence as well as individual accountability.

• In team-based learning, two approaches promote positive interdependence and individual accountability. First, students take an individual readiness assessment test, and then immediately take the same test again as a group. Their grade is a composite of the two scores. Second, students complete a group project together, and receive a group score on the project. They also, however, distribute points among their group partners, allowing student assessment of members’ contributions to contribute to the final score.
• Heller and Hollabaugh (1992) describe an approach in which they incorporated group problem-solving into a class. Students regularly solved problems in small groups, turning in a single solution. In addition, tests were structured such that 25% of the points derived from a group problem, where only those individuals who attended the group problem-solving sessions could participate in the group test problem.  This approach can help prevent the “free rider” problem that can plague group work.
• The University of New South Wales describes a variety of ways to assess group work , ranging from shared group grades, to grades that are averages of individual grades, to strictly individual grades, to a combination of these. They also suggest ways to assess not only the product of the group work but also the process.  Again, having a portion of a grade that derives from individual contribution helps combat the free rider problem.

Helping groups get started

Explain the group’s task, including your goals for their academic achievement and social interaction.

Explain how the task involves both positive interdependence and individual accountability, and how you will be assessing each.

Assign group roles or give groups prompts to help them articulate effective ways for interaction. The University of New South Wales provides a valuable set of tools to help groups establish good practices when first meeting. The site also provides some exercises for building group dynamics; these may be particularly valuable for groups that will be working on larger projects.

Monitoring group work

Regularly observe group interactions and progress , either by circulating during group work, collecting in-process documents, or both. When you observe problems, intervene to help students move forward on the task and work together effectively. The University of New South Wales provides handouts that instructors can use to promote effective group interactions, such as a handout to help students listen reflectively or give constructive feedback , or to help groups identify particular problems that they may be encountering.

Assessing and reflecting

In addition to providing feedback on group and individual performance (link to preparation section above), it is also useful to provide a structure for groups to reflect on what worked well in their group and what could be improved. Graham Gibbs (1994) suggests using the checklists shown below.

The University of New South Wales provides other reflective activities that may help students identify effective group practices and avoid ineffective practices in future cooperative learning experiences.

Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., and Cocking, R.R. (Eds.) (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school . Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Bruffee, K. A. (1993). Collaborative learning: Higher education, interdependence, and the authority of knowledge. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Cabrera, A. F., Crissman, J. L., Bernal, E. M., Nora, A., Terenzini, P. T., & Pascarella, E. T. (2002). Collaborative learning: Its impact on college students’ development and diversity. Journal of College Student Development, 43 (1), 20-34.

Davidson, N., & Major, C. H. (2014). Boundary crossing: Cooperative learning, collaborative learning, and problem-based learning. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25 (3&4), 7-55.

Dees, R. L. (1991). The role of cooperative leaning in increasing problem-solving ability in a college remedial course. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22 (5), 409-21.

Gokhale, A. A. (1995). Collaborative Learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 7 (1).

Heller, P., and Hollabaugh, M. (1992) Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 2: Designing problems and structuring groups. American Journal of Physics 60, 637-644.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., and Smith, K.A. (2006). Active learning: Cooperation in the university classroom (3 rd edition). Edina, MN: Interaction.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., and Holubec, E.J. (2008). Cooperation in the classroom (8 th edition). Edina, MN: Interaction.

Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., and Smith, K.A. (2014). Cooperative learning: Improving university instruction by basing practice on validated theory. Journl on Excellence in College Teaching 25, 85-118.

Jones, D. J., & Brickner, D. (1996). Implementation of cooperative learning in a large-enrollment basic mechanics course. American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference Proceedings.

Kuh, G.D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J., Bridges, B., and Hayek, J.C. (2007). Piecing together the student success puzzle: Research, propositions, and recommendations (ASHE Higher Education Report, No. 32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Love, A. G., Dietrich, A., Fitzgerald, J., & Gordon, D. (2014). Integrating collaborative learning inside and outside the classroom. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25 (3&4), 177-196.

Smith, M. E., Hinckley, C. C., & Volk, G. L. (1991). Cooperative learning in the undergraduate laboratory. Journal of Chemical Education 68 (5), 413-415.

Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 96 (1), 21-51.

Uribe, D., Klein, J. D., & Sullivan, H. (2003). The effect of computer-mediated collaborative learning on solving ill-defined problems. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51 (1), 5-19.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Teaching Guides

Quick Links

• Services for Departments and Schools
• Examples of Online Instructional Modules

Center for Teaching Innovation

Resource library.

• Examples of Collaborative Learning or Group Work Activities
• Getting Started with Designing Group Work Assignments
• Getting Started with Evaluating Group Work
• Team-Based Learning Collaborative

Collaborative Learning

Collaborative learning can occur peer-to-peer or in larger groups. Peer learning, or peer instruction, is a type of collaborative learning that involves students working in pairs or small groups to discuss concepts or find solutions to problems. Similar to the idea that two or three heads are better than one, educational researchers have found that through peer instruction, students teach each other by addressing misunderstandings and clarifying misconceptions.

Why use collaborative learning?

Research shows that educational experiences that are active, social, contextual, engaging, and student-owned lead to deeper learning. The benefits of collaborative learning include:

• Development of higher-level thinking, oral communication, self-management, and leadership skills.
• Promotion of student-faculty interaction.
• Increase in student retention, self-esteem, and responsibility.
• Exposure to and an increase in understanding of diverse perspectives.
• Preparation for real life social and employment situations.

Considerations for using collaborative learning

• Introduce group or peer work early in the semester to set clear student expectations.
• Establish ground rules   for participation and contributions.
• Plan for each stage of group work.
• Carefully explain to your students how groups or peer discussion will operate and how students will be graded.
• Help students develop the skills they need to succeed, such as using team-building exercises or introducing self-reflection techniques.
• Consider using written contracts.
• Incorporate   self -assessment  and   peer  assessment  for group members to evaluate their own and others' contributions.

Getting started with collaborative learning

Shorter in-class collaborative learning activities generally involve a three-step process. This process can be as short as five minutes, but can be longer, depending on the task at hand.

• Introduce the task. This can be as simple as instructing students to turn to their neighbor to discuss or debate a topic.
• Provide students with enough time to engage with the task. Walk around and address any questions as needed.
• Debrief. Call on a few students to share a summary of their conclusions. Address any misconceptions or clarify any confusing points. Open the floor for questions.

For larger group work projects, here are some strategies to help ensure productive group dynamics:

• Provide opportunities for students to develop rapport and group cohesion through   icebreakers , team-building, and reflection exercises.
• Give students time to create a group work plan allowing them to plan for deadlines and divide up their responsibilities.
• Have students   establish ground rules . Students can create a contract for each member to sign. This contract can include agreed-upon penalties for those who fail to fulfill obligations.
• Assign roles to members of each group and change the roles periodically. For example, one student can be the coordinator, another the note-taker, another the summarizer, and another the planner of next steps.
• Allow students to rate each other’s quality and quantity of contributions. Use these evaluations when giving individual grades, but do not let it weigh heavily on a student's final grade. Communicate clearly how peer assessment will influence grades.
• Check in with groups intermittently but encourage students to handle their own issues before coming to you for assistance.

Top 15 Benefits Of Group Study For Students

Link Copied

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Team work = Dream work!

Studying alone sometimes feels like aimlessly wandering a deserted island. You start to feel burnt out and run out of fresh ideas. Let’s ditch the isolation chamber and embrace the benefits of group study! When the word “study” slides into our conversations, we all make a face. However, the benefits of studying in groups can change your perception and help you learn concepts in a unique way. Think of studying together to solve problems that have been keeping you at night. You can get quicker clarity on the concepts, find motivation during study sesh, and have fun while learning. If you think a group study with your friends is what you need before exams, we have all the information you need. Let’s dive into what group study is and the various benefits of learning in groups! 

What Is Group Study?

Before we delve into the benefits of studying in a group, let’s discover how it works. A study group consists of a small number of individuals who gather to explore a shared area of study, enhancing the learning experience. Anyone can be your study partner; you can choose your friends or classmates – make sure the person helps you stay on track with your syllabus. One of the best benefits of group study for students is that they find beauty in collaboration. This way, you can find new perspectives and methods to solve problems quicker than usual.

Top 15 Benefits of Group Study for Students 

Studying solo like a zombie in cram mode? The tremendous benefits of joining a study group can fill the holes in your knowledge and test your understanding. With jokes in between, the dullest subjects seem interesting, helping you grasp the core importance of group study. Below, we mention the essential benefits of having a study group if you want to accelerate your learning curve! 

1. Teamwork and Collaboration 

The advantages of joining a study group surely enhance your personal and professional development. Your study group will encourage and motivate you to think creatively. You will learn how to articulate your problems , feel confident , and relax about your academic aspirations. Needless to say, one of the most important benefits of group study is that you can hone your soft skills and achieve your academic goals at the same time. While working together like training units to find solutions, you will soon realise the benefits of group discussion on your own. Even though we all face group work challenges , a study group can do wonders!

2. Avoid Procrastination 

Did you know that the University of Guelph found that 76% of students who study in groups start their assignments sooner? When you study together, you are less likely to procrastinate, and it’s one of the advantages of group study. Pick a time slot for the group study and set a goal for every meeting. Also, one of the benefits of group study is that you can stay away from distractions. Especially if you tend to delay your tasks, the peer pressure will help you get your work done faster. You can stay connected and feel committed to your tasks.  

3. New Perspectives

When you study solo, you always look at the material from your perspective. Though it’s not a bad thing, gaining a new perspective on a topic can help you learn more thoroughly. The ample benefits of a group study will help you pick up on new perspectives. If you listen to what others have to say on the same topic, you can find a new approach to the problem . Learning in groups sharpens your critical thinking skills and helps you explore more ideas , helping you leverage many group study benefits. 

Study with your group and let amber take care of your accommodation needs!

Book through amber today!

7. Problem Resolving Gets Easy

Among many benefits of group study, the best one is that you can find the much-needed solution way faster. Sometimes, we do not have a strong grasp of a topic and end up with a line of queries. On top of that, not having someone to clear the cloud of confusion gets frustrating. However, one of the best benefits of group study is that you can discuss and answer questions with several other group members. You will have more time to do other things and improve your research skills . 

8. Learn New Study Skills

One of the most important benefits of group study is picking up new study skills . With regular group studies, you can learn methods to learn difficult course material by heart. Your group can use new and effective studying methods and approach a subject that seems like a mystery. After trying and testing new methods, you can change your study program and find a way that suits you. If you are clueless about making a realistic study plan, the proven tips on how to study effectively will make you the star of your study group. 

9. Few Extra Hands

One of the advantages of studying in groups is getting extra suppor t. As you work toward shared learning goals in groups, you can encourage each other to stay motivated to reach their goals. Finishing your daily tasks does not feel tedious when you have friends helping each other and realise the different benefits of group study. Even if it seems easier said than done, finding the right people for a study group is difficult. However, you can ace the hacks of how to make friends in college , find the perfect partner, and get the best benefits of group study.

10. Makes You Committed

Being part of a study group can help you develop social and communication skills, as you must actively listen and communicate effectively with your group members. The importance of group study is that you never feel left out, and retreating is never an option. Pushed by peer motivation, you feel strong enough to conquer together. These advantages of study groups create a sense of community and support among the students, as they can motivate and encourage each other to succeed.

11. Reduces Anxiety

When the exams knock on our doors, most of us don’t have the time to catch our breath. Instead of succumbing to anxiety and sleepless nights, you can turn to your study partners and ask them to tutor you. It’s one of the best benefits of learning in groups because you find your new support system. Having a group study means you have someone to talk to about what you are going through. Plus, it’s just a human thing - you feel better when you see others in the same situation. 

12. Accountability

Let’s say you become a tech lead in the future. As a responsible leader, you will be accountable for everyone’s work. For some, this skill comes to many naturally, but some may fall behind. One of the great benefits of group study is you can learn how to be accountable for any work. While in a study group, you will learn how to keep track of everyone’s deadlines . You can also understand how to finish tasks on time while helping everyone. 

13. Peer Review

Peer review is one of the vital benefits of group study. You can receive feedback from your study partners and understand how to work on the things you are behind. The suggestions and inputs you and your mates put together can create a holistic environment . With this collaborative style, you can get work done faster than usual.

14. Increased Confidence

One of the exciting advantages of group study is that you start believing in yourself ! Let’s say you know that you have the bandwidth but cannot find the push to complete. Group study is a way to be more confident in your skin and mould yourself in a new way. Group members can also help you find your strengths and weaknesses for any topic. Then, you can work on how to turn your weaknesses into your greatest strengths. 

15. Social Interaction

Is studying in groups more effective than studying alone? Well, staying productive for constructive interaction is one of the advantages of joining a study group. You can gain insights and opinions from others regarding various topics, which can help them study better. This is one of the prominent group study benefits since students get to enhance their communication and delivery skills.

8 Effective Group Study Tips to Know 

As you are sitting down for a group study session, you will have to follow some tips if you'd like to have an effective session. Here are some tips you should follow; 

1. When you sit for a group study, remember that your group should not have more than five members ; this can affect the team's total productivity. 

2. Appoint a responsible leader who will ensure that the group covers all the topics and pays extra attention to essential topics required to be assigned. 

3. The group leader should also be responsible for setting timings and dates for the study sessions. The leader must ensure the group doesn't miss sessions. 

4. All group members should be comfortable to ask questions , and they should not hesitate at all. 

5. You should always remember that having fun is important , as it’s not a class. Learning outside the classroom is also one of the advantages of studying in groups. 

6. Always do a quick catch-up of the previous day and remember to summarise the important points. 

7. Bond with your study mates outside of class and the group as a bond will help you understand your concepts better.

8. You can also use the best study apps for students to be more productive and have fun while learning.   

Now, you know there is an array of benefits of group study that you can easily tap into! You can stay organised, enhance your understanding of the material, improve your communication skills, and beyond. You can also use the best study planning apps to set a goal, take notes, and gamify your study sesh. Through the study group benefits, you can create a sense of community and grab opportunities to accelerate your academic & personal growth. In case you have started preparing for exams with your study partner, the tips on how to study for finals this year will help you see the light at the end of the tunnel. So, have fun and learn the better way!

Frequently Asked Questions

1. what are the benefits of group study, what is the group study method, why is group learning beneficial, what are the advantages and disadvantages of an individual study and a group study, how does grouping affect a student's achievement, how does grouping affect a student’s achievement.

Your ideal student home & a flight ticket awaits

Follow us on :

Related Posts

Top 10 Branches of Philosophy: Meta Physics, Epistiomology & More

Top 10 Toughest Exams in the World

10 Hardest Engineering Degrees In the World In 2024

amber © 2024. All rights reserved.

4.8/5 on Trustpilot

Rated as "Excellent" • 4800+ Reviews by students

Rated as "Excellent" • 4800+ Reviews by Students

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

Group work as an incentive for learning – students’ experiences of group work

Group work is used as a means for learning at all levels in educational systems. There is strong scientific support for the benefits of having students learning and working in groups. Nevertheless, studies about what occurs in groups during group work and which factors actually influence the students’ ability to learn is still lacking. Similarly, the question of why some group work is successful and other group work results in the opposite is still unsolved. The aim of this article is to add to the current level of knowledge and understandings regarding the essence behind successful group work in higher education. This research is focused on the students’ experiences of group work and learning in groups, which is an almost non-existing aspect of research on group work prior to the beginning of the 21st century. A primary aim is to give university students a voice in the matter by elucidating the students’ positive and negative points of view and how the students assess learning when working in groups. Furthermore, the students’ explanations of why some group work ends up being a positive experience resulting in successful learning, while in other cases, the result is the reverse, are of interest. Data were collected through a study-specific questionnaire, with multiple choice and open-ended questions. The questionnaires were distributed to students in different study programs at two universities in Sweden. The present result is based on a reanalysis and qualitative analysis formed a key part of the study. The results indicate that most of the students’ experiences involved group work that facilitated learning, especially in the area of academic knowledge. Three important prerequisites (learning, study-social function, and organization) for group work that served as an effective pedagogy and as an incentive for learning were identified and discussed. All three abstractions facilitate or hamper students’ learning, as well as impact their experiences with group work.

INTRODUCTION

Group work is used as a means for learning at all levels in most educational systems, from compulsory education to higher education. The overarching purpose of group work in educational practice is to serve as an incentive for learning. For example, it is believed that the students involved in the group activity should “learn something.” This prerequisite has influenced previous research to predominantly focus on how to increase efficiency in group work and how to understand why some group work turns out favorably and other group work sessions result in the opposite. The review of previous research shows that in the 20th century, there has been an increase in research about students’ cooperation in the classroom ( Lou et al., 1996 ; Gillies and Boyle, 2010 , 2011 ). This increasing interest can be traced back to the fact that both researchers and teachers have become aware of the positive effects that collaboration might have on students’ ability to learn. The main concern in the research area has been on how interaction and cooperation among students influence learning and problem solving in groups ( Hammar Chiriac, 2011a , b ).

Two approaches concerning learning in group are of interest, namely cooperative learning and collaborative learning . There seems to be a certain amount of confusion concerning how these concepts are to be interpreted and used, as well as what they actually signify. Often the conceptions are used synonymously even though there are some differentiations. Cooperative group work is usually considered as a comprehensive umbrella concept for several modes of student active working modes ( Johnson and Johnson, 1975 ; Webb and Palincsar, 1996 ), whereas collaboration is a more of an exclusive concept and may be included in the much wider concept cooperation ( Hammar Chiriac, 2011a , b ). Cooperative learning may describe group work without any interaction between the students (i.e., the student may just be sitting next to each other; Bennet and Dunne, 1992 ; Galton and Williamson, 1992 ), while collaborative learning always includes interaction, collaboration, and utilization of the group’s competences ( Bennet and Dunne, 1992 ; Galton and Williamson, 1992 ; Webb and Palincsar, 1996 ).

At the present time, there is strong scientific support for the benefits of students learning and working in groups. In addition, the research shows that collaborative work promotes both academic achievement and collaborative abilities ( Johnson and Johnson, 2004 ; Baines et al., 2007 ; Gillies and Boyle, 2010 , 2011 ). According to Gillies and Boyle (2011) , the benefits are consistent irrespective of age (pre-school to college) and/or curriculum. When working interactively with others, students learn to inquire, share ideas, clarify differences, problem-solve, and construct new understandings. Gillies (2003a , b ) also stresses that students working together are more motivated to achieve than they would be when working individually. Thus, group work might serve as an incentive for learning, in terms of both academic knowledge and interpersonal skills. Nevertheless, studies about what occur in groups during group work and which factors actually influence the students’ ability to learn is still lacking in the literature, especially when it comes to addressing the students’ points of view, with some exceptions ( Cantwell and Andrews, 2002 ; Underwood, 2003 ; Peterson and Miller, 2004 ; Hansen, 2006 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ). Similarly, the question of why some group work turns out successfully and other work results in the opposite is still unsolved. In this article, we hope to contribute some new pieces of information concerning the why some group work results in positive experiences and learning, while others result in the opposite.

GROUP WORK IN EDUCATION

Group work is frequently used in higher education as a pedagogical mode in the classroom, and it is viewed as equivalent to any other pedagogical practice (i.e., whole class lesson or individual work). Without considering the pros and cons of group work, a non-reflective choice of pedagogical mode might end up resulting in less desirable consequences. A reflective choice, on the other hand, might result in positive experiences and enhanced learning ( Galton et al., 2009 ; Gillies and Boyle, 2011 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ).

GROUP WORK AS OBJECTIVE OR MEANS

Group work might serve different purposes. As mentioned above, the overall purpose of the group work in education is that the students who participate in group work “learn something.” Learning can be in terms of academic knowledge or “group knowledge.” Group knowledge refers to learning to work in groups ( Kutnick and Beredondini, 2009 ; Gillies and Boyle, 2010 , 2011 ; Hammar Chiriac, 2011a , b ). Affiliation, fellowship, and welfare might be of equal importance as academic knowledge, or they may even be prerequisites for learning. Thus, the group and the group work serve more functions than just than “just” being a pedagogical mode. Hence, before group work is implemented, it is important to consider the purpose the group assignment will have as the objective, the means, or both.

From a learning perspective, group work might function as both an objective (i.e., learning collaborative abilities) and as the means (i.e., a base for academic achievement) or both ( Gillies, 2003a , b ; Johnson and Johnson, 2004 ; Baines et al., 2007 ). If the purpose of the group work is to serve as an objective, the group’s function is to promote students’ development of group work abilities, such as social training and interpersonal skills. If, on the other hand, group work is used as a means to acquire academic knowledge, the group and the collaboration in the group become a base for students’ knowledge acquisition ( Gillies, 2003a , b ; Johnson and Johnson, 2004 ; Baines et al., 2007 ). The group contributes to the acquisition of knowledge and stimulates learning, thus promoting academic performance. Naturally, group work can be considered to be a learning environment, where group work is used both as an objective and as the means. One example of this concept is in the case of tutorial groups in problem-based learning. Both functions are important and might complement and/or even promote each other. Albeit used for different purposes, both approaches might serve as an incentive for learning, emphasizing different aspect knowledge, and learning in a group within an educational setting.

WORKING IN A GROUP OR AS A GROUP

Even if group work is often defined as “pupils working together as a group or a team,” ( Blatchford et al., 2003 , p. 155), it is important to bear in mind that group work is not just one activity, but several activities with different conditions ( Hammar Chiriac, 2008 , 2010 ). This implies that group work may change characteristics several times during a group work session and/or during a group’s lifetime, thus suggesting that certain working modes may be better suited for different parts of a group’s work and vice versa ( Hammar Chiriac, 2008 , 2010 ). It is also important to differentiate between how the work is accomplished in the group, whether by working in a group or working as a group.

From a group work perspective, there are two primary ways of discussing cooperation in groups: working in a group (cooperation) or working as a group (collaboration; Underwood, 2003 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ). Situations where students are sitting together in a group but working individually on separate parts of a group assignment are referred to as working in a group . This is not an uncommon situation within an educational setting ( Gillies and Boyle, 2011 ). Cooperation between students might occur, but it is not necessary to accomplish the group’s task. At the end of the task, the students put their separate contributions together into a joint product ( Galton and Williamson, 1992 ; Hammar Chiriac, 2010 , 2011a ). While no cooperative activities are mandatory while working in a group, cooperative learning may occur. However, the benefits in this case are an effect of social facilitation ( Zajonc, 1980 ; Baron, 1986 ; Uziel, 2007 ) and are not caused by cooperation. In this situation, social facilitation alludes to the enhanced motivational effect that the presence of other students have on individual student’s performance.

Working as a group, on the other hand, causes learning benefits from collaboration with other group members. Working as a group is often referred to as “real group work” or “meaningful group work,” and denotes group work in which students utilizes the group members’ skills and work together to achieve a common goal. Moreover, working as a group presupposes collaboration, and that all group members will be involved in and working on a common task to produce a joint outcome ( Bennet and Dunne, 1992 ; Galton and Williamson, 1992 ; Webb and Palincsar, 1996 ; Hammar Chiriac, 2011a , b ). Working as a group is characterized by common effort, the utilization of the group’s competence, and the presence of problem solving and reflection. According to Granström (2006) , working as a group is a more uncommon activity in an educational setting. Both approaches might be useful in different parts of group work, depending on the purpose of the group work and type of task assigned to the group ( Hammar Chiriac, 2008 ). Working in a group might lead to cooperative learning, while working as group might facilitate collaborative learning. While there are differences between the real meanings of the concepts, the terms are frequently used interchangeably ( Webb and Palincsar, 1996 ; Hammar Chiriac, 2011a , b ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ).

PREVIOUS RESEARCH OF STUDENTS’ EXPERIENCES

As mentioned above, there are a limited number of studies concerning the participants’ perspectives on group work. Teachers often have to rely upon spontaneous viewpoints and indications about and students’ experiences of group work in the form of completed course evaluations. However, there are some exceptions ( Cantwell and Andrews, 2002 ; Underwood, 2003 ; Peterson and Miller, 2004 ; Hansen, 2006 ; Hammar Chiriac and Einarsson, 2007 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ). To put this study in a context and provide a rationale for the present research, a selection of studies focusing on pupils’ and/or students’ experiences and conceptions of group work will be briefly discussed below. The pupils’ and/or students inside knowledge group work may present information relevant in all levels of educational systems.

Hansen (2006) conducted a small study with 34 participating students at a business faculty, focusing on the participants’ experiences of group work. In the study different aspects of students’ positive experiences of group work were identified. For example, it was found to be necessary that all group members take part and make an effort to take part in the group work, clear goals are set for the work, role differentiation exists among members, the task has some level of relevance, and there is clear leadership. Even though Hansen’s (2006) study was conducted in higher education, these findings may be relevant in other levels in educational systems.

To gain more knowledge and understand about the essence behind high-quality group work, Hammar Chiriac and Einarsson (2007) turned their focus toward students’ experiences and conceptions of group work in higher education. A primary aim was to give university students a voice in the matter by elucidating their students’ points of view and how the students assess working in groups. Do the students’ appreciate group projects or do they find it boring and even as a waste of time? Would some students prefer to work individually, or even in “the other group?” The study was a part of a larger research project on group work in education and only a small part of the data corpus was analyzed. Different critical aspects were identified as important incitements for whether the group work turned out to be a success or a failure. The students’ positive, as well as negative, experiences of group work include both task-related (e.g., learning, group composition, participants’ contribution, time) and socio-emotional (e.g., affiliation, conflict, group climate) aspects of group work. The students described their own group, as well as other groups, in a realistic way and did not believe that the grass was greener in the other group. The same data corpus is used in this article (see under Section The Previous Analysis). According to Underwood (2003) and Peterson and Miller (2004) , the students’ enthusiasm for group work is affected by type of task, as well as the group’s members. One problem that recurred frequently concerned students who did not contribute to the group work, also known as so-called free-riders ( Hammar Chiriac and Hempel, 2013 ). Students are, in general, reluctant to punish free-riders and antipathy toward working in groups is often associated with a previous experience of having free-riders in the group ( Peterson and Miller, 2004 ). To accomplish a favorable attitude toward group work, the advantages of collaborative activities as a means for learning must be elucidated. Furthermore, students must be granted a guarantee that free-riders will not bring the group in an unfavorable light. The free-riders, on the other hand, must be encouraged to participate in the common project.

Hammar Chiriac and Granström (2012) were also interested in students’ experiences and conceptions of high-quality and low-quality group work in school and how students aged 13–16 describe good and bad group work? Hammar Chiriac and Granström (2012) show that the students seem to have a clear conception of what constitutes group work and what does not. According to the students, genuine group work is characterized by collaboration on an assignment given by the teacher. They describe group work as working together with their classmates on a common task. The students are also fully aware that successful group work calls for members with appropriate skills that are focused on the task and for all members take part in the common work. Furthermore, the results disclose what students consider being important requisites for successful versus more futile group work. The students’ inside knowledge about classroom activities ended up in a taxonomy of crucial conditions for high-quality group work. The six conditions were: (a) organization of group work conditions, (b) mode of working in groups, (c) tasks given in group work, (d) reporting group work, (e) assessment of group work, and (f) the role of the teacher in group work. The most essential condition for the students seemed to be group composition and the participants’ responsibilities and contributions. According to the students, a well-organized group consists of approximately three members, which allows the group to not be too heterogeneous. Members should be allotted a reasonable amount of time and be provided with an environment that is not too noisy. Hence, all six aspects are related to the role of the teacher’s leadership since the first five points concern the framework and prerequisites created by the teacher.

Näslund (2013) summarized students’ and researchers’ joint knowledge based on experience and research on in the context of shared perspective for group work. As a result, Näslund noticed a joint apprehension concerning what constitutes “an ideal group work.” Näslund (2013) highlighted the fact that both students and researchers emphasized for ideal group work to occur, the following conditions were important to have: (a) the group work is carried out in supportive context, (b) cooperation occurs, (c) the group work is well-structured, (d) students come prepared and act as working members during the meetings, and (e) group members show respect for each other.

From this brief exposition of a selection of research focusing on students’ views on group work, it is obvious that more systematic studies or documentations on students’ conceptions and experiences of group work within higher education are relevant and desired. The present study, which is a reanalysis of a corpus of data addressing the students’ perspective of group, is a step in that direction.

AIM OF THE STUDY

The overarching knowledge interest of this study is to enhance the body of knowledge regarding group work in higher education. The aim of this article is to add knowledge and understanding of what the essence behind successful group work in higher education is by focusing on the students’ experiences and conceptions of group work and learning in groups , an almost non-existing aspect of research on group work until the beginning of the 21st century. A primary aim is to give university students a voice in the matter by elucidating the students’ positive and negative points of view and how the students assess learning when working in groups. Furthermore, the students’ explanations of why some group work results in positive experiences and learning, while in other cases, the result is the opposite, are of interest.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To capture university students’ experiences and conceptions of group work, an inductive qualitative approach, which emphasizes content and meaning rather than quantification, was used ( Breakwell et al., 2006 ; Bryman, 2012 ). The empirical data were collected through a study-specific, semi-structured questionnaire and a qualitative content analysis was performed ( Mayring, 2000 ; Graneheim and Lundman, 2003 ; Elo and Kyngäs, 2007 ).

PARTICIPANTS

All participating students attended traditional university programs where group work was a central and frequently used pedagogical method in the educational design. In addition, the participants’ programs allowed the students to be allocated to the same groups for a longer period of time, in some cases during a whole semester. University programs using specific pedagogical approaches, such as problem-based learning or case method, were not included in this study.

The participants consisted of a total of 210 students, 172 female and 38 male, from two universities in two different cities (approximately division: 75 and 25%). The students came from six different populations in four university programs: (a) The Psychologist Program/Master of Science in Psychology, (b) The Human Resource Management and Work Sciences Program, (c) Social Work Program, and (d) The Bachelor’s Programs in Biology. The informants were studying in their first through eighth terms, but the majority had previous experiences from working in other group settings. Only 2% of the students had just started their first term when the study was conducted, while the vast majority (96%) was participating in university studies in their second to sixth semester.

The teacher most frequently arranged the group composition and only a few students stated that they have had any influence on the group formation. There were, with a few exceptions, between 6 and 10 groups in each of the programs included in this study. The groups consisted of between four to eight members and the differences in sizes were almost proportionally distributed among the research group. The groups were foremost heterogeneous concerning gender, but irrespective of group size, there seems to have been a bias toward more women than men in most of the groups. When there was an underrepresented sex in the group, the minority mostly included two students of the same gender. More than 50% of the students answered that in this particularly group, they worked solely with new group members, i.e., students they had not worked with in previous group work during the program.

To collect data about students’ experiences and conceptions of group work, a study-specific, semi-structured questionnaire was constructed. The questionnaire approached the students’ experiences regarding the specific group work they were working in at the time of the data collection (spring 2006), not their experiences of group work in general. The questionnaire contained a total of 18 questions, including both multiple choice and open-ended questions. The multiple choice questions concerned background variables and information about the present group. The seven open-ended questions were designed to gather data about the students’ experiences and perceptions of group work in higher education. The questionnaires were distributed to the different populations of students (some populations studied at the same program) at two universities in Sweden. During the time the questionnaires were completed, the researcher or an assistant was present to answer possible questions. In all, 210 students answered the questionnaire.

The previous analysis

As described above (Section Previous Research of Students’ Experiences) a previous analysis based on the same data corpus revealed that most of the students included in the study found group work to be an enjoyable and stimulating working method ( Hammar Chiriac and Einarsson, 2007 ). The data were analyzed using a qualitative content analysis based on three different research questions. There were two main criticisms of the previous study presented from other researchers. The criticism conveyed applied mostly to the question of whether we could assemble these groups into a joint research group and second to the fact that the results were mostly descriptive. To counter this criticism and to elaborate on the analysis, a further analysis was conducted.

The present analysis

The present analysis (or reanalysis) was conducted by using an inductive qualitative content analysis based on three open-ended research questions:

(1) In what ways does group work contribute to your learning?

(2) What positive experiences have you had while working in your present group?

(3) What negative experiences have you had while working in your present group?

Each question corresponds to one aspect of the research’s objective, but together, they might support and enrich each other and unravel new information based on the students’ experiences and conceptions of group work. Research question 1, listed above, was not included in the first analysis and is being investigated for the first time in this study, while the other two questions are being reanalyzed. An inductive, qualitative content analysis is applicable when the aim of the research is a description of the meaning or of a phenomenon in conceptual form ( Mayring, 2000 ; Graneheim and Lundman, 2003 ; Elo and Kyngäs, 2007 ).

The analysis was carried out over several steps, following the basic principles of an inductive, qualitative content analysis ( Mayring, 2000 ; Graneheim and Lundman, 2003 ; Elo and Kyngäs, 2007 ). The steps included three phases: preparation, organizing, and reporting ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2007 ). Each question was treated as a unit of analysis and was thus analyzed separately. In the preparation phase, the researcher tried to make sense of the data by becoming familiar with the data corpus. In the current study, this included transcription and thorough reading of the answers. An open coding system composed of marginal notes and headings began the second phase, which included organizing the data. This second phase, in turn, included open coding, creating categories, and abstraction. The notes and the headings from the open coding were transferred to coding sheets and then grouped into categories. Categories were formed through the interpretation of the codes that described the same meaning or phenomenon. Finally, an abstraction process began, where a general description of the grouped categories formed an abstraction (see Table ​ Table1 1 ). An abstraction was denominated using the content-characteristic words for this paper: learning, study-social function, and organization . The third phase, reporting , addressed the presentation of the process of analysis and the results.

Examples from the organization phase of the coding process.

The final aim of this study is to present the phenomenon studied in a model or conceptual map of the categories ( Elo and Kyngäs, 2007 ). In following these procedures, we aim to expand our understanding of the existing work and to counter the second part of the criticisms, which included criticisms stating that the results were mostly descriptive in nature. To counter the criticisms regarding the question of whether we could assemble these groups into a joint research group, the qualitative abstraction that emerged from the qualitative content analysis was compared to background information by using SPSS. Three background variables were used: gender, cities, and programs.

ETHICS AND QUALITY

The ethical principles provided by the British Psychology Society have formed a guideline [ British Psychology Society (BPS), 2006 ] for the present study. The ethical principles, which emphasize the concern for participants’ interest, have been applied throughout the study [ American Psychological Association (APA), 2002 ; British Psychology Society (BPS), 2004 ; Barett, 2007 ]. To facilitate trustworthiness, a thorough description of the analysis process has been presented ( Graneheim and Lundman, 2003 ; Elo and Kyngäs, 2007 ). Translated citations are also included to increase trustworthiness.

As described above, the analysis resulted in three abstraction emerging: learning, study-social function , and organization . Each abstraction includes both a positive variant (i.e., facilitating learning, study-social function, and/or organization) as well as a negative alternative (i.e., hampering learning, study-social function, and/or organization). The results will be presented in three different sections, with each section corresponding to one abstraction. However, we would like to call attention to the fact that one fifth (20%, including missing value 8%) of the students included in this study did not perceive and/or mention any negative experiences at all in their present group. From a general point of view, there is no difference with respect to gender or city regarding the distribution of positive and negative experiences concerning the abstractions, neither concerning different programs nor the distribution of negative experiences (all p > 0.05). In contrast, there is a difference between the various programs and the distribution of positive experiences (χ 2 = 14.474; df: 6; p < 0.025). The students from the social work program display a higher amount of positive experiences in connection with a study-social function and organizing in comparison with the other programs.

The majority of the students (97%) responded that working in group somehow facilitated learning, academic knowledge, collaborative abilities or both. They learned more or different things when working in groups than they would have if working alone. By discussing and questioning each other’s points of view and listening to their fellow students’ contributions, thus obtaining different perspectives, the participants experienced an enhanced academic learning, compared to working alone. “I learn much more by working in groups than working individually. I obtain more through interaction with the other group members.” Academic knowledge is not the only type of knowledge learned through group work. In addition to academic knowledge, students also gain advanced knowledge about how groups work, how the students function as individual members of groups and how other members behave and work in groups. Some of the respondents also argued that group work in group courses strengthen the combination between empirical and theoretical learning, thus learning about groups by working in groups. “Through practical knowledge demonstrate several of the phenomena we read about in theory (group psychology and sociology).”

The results show no difference when considering either gender or city. However, when comparing the four programs included in the study and the types of learning, a difference occurs (χ 2 = 14.474; df: 6; p < 0.025). A division into two parts seems to generate the difference. On the one hand, the students from the Bachelor’s Program in Biology and the students from the Human Resource Management and Work Sciences Program emphasize academic knowledge. On the other hand, students from the Psychologist Program/Master of Science in Psychology and Social Work Program more often mentioned learning collaborative abilities single handed, as well as a combination of academic knowledge and group learning.

Even though the participants did not expressly report that group work hampered learning, they often mentioned that they perceived group work as being ineffective due to loss of focus and the presence of conflicts, thereby hampering conceivable learning. One respondent stated, “that you sometimes are out of focus in the discussion and get side-tracked instead of considering the task.” Another offered the following perspective: “Occasionally, it is too little task related and feels unnecessary sometimes. Individual work is, in certain situations, preferable.” Group work might be perceived as ineffective and time consuming considering long working periods with tedious discussions. One participant stated, “The time aspect, everything is time consuming.” The absence or presence of conflicts in the group affects students’ experiences, and conflicts not handled may influence learning in a negative way. The students perceived that it was difficult to come to an agreement and experience those conflicts and the need to compromise hampered individual learning. Accordingly, the absence of conflicts seemed to be an important incitement for learning. However, fear of conflicts can lead to reduced learning and cause negative experiences, but to a considerably lesser extent than does the presence of actual conflicts. “A great fear of conflicts sometimes raises an oppressive atmosphere.” “Fear of conflicts leads to much not made known.”

A STUDY-SOCIAL FUNCTION

Group work also has an important study - social function according to the students. They describe their membership in groups as an important aspect of affiliation. In general, the total number of students at a program is approximately 60–80 or more. In contexts with a large population of students, the smaller group gives the participants an opportunity to feel affiliated with the group and to each other. “Feels safe to have a certain group to prepare oneself together with before, for instance, an upcoming seminar.” The group gives the individual student a platform of belonging, which might serve as an important arena for learning ( facilitate ) and finding friends to spend leisure time with. Many of the participants also reported feeling a positive atmosphere in the group, which is important for the satisfaction of being in the group together with the fellow students.

To be a member of a group may also serve as a function of relief, both academically and socially, for the individual student. The participants reported that many of the tasks assigned by the university teachers are difficult to handle on their own. “The others explain to me. We help one another.” However, the students reported that they helped and supported each other, even if the task did not demand cooperation. “As a student, you get more active. You help one another to extract the groups’ common knowledge. Forward info if somebody is missing.” Being a member of a group also affects students’ motivation to study. They prepare themselves by reading texts and other material before the next group session. Group work may also have positive effects on achievement. Students’ total amount of time and effort on their work may also increase. Through group work, the participants also get confirmation of who they are and what their capacities are.

Being a member of a group also has its downside, which often has to do with the group climate and/or group processes, both of which have multiple and complex features. Many students reported that both the group climate and group processes might be the source of negative conceptions of the group and hamper learning. “Process losses.” The respondents described negative conceptions based on the feeling of not having enough time to get to know each other in the group or being in situations where no cooperation occurred. Other students referred to the fact that the group’s life is too long, which may lead to group members not only wearing each other out, but also having a negative effect on each other’s mood. “Influenced by each other’s mood.” Examples of negative experiences are process losses in general, including insufficient communication, unclear roles, and problems with one group member. As mentioned above, the students from the Social Work Program display a higher number of positive experiences in connection with a study-social function and organizing in comparison with students from the other programs.

ORGANIZATION

O rganization concerns the structure of group work and includes different aspects, all describing group work from different angles. The aspects are relevant no matter how the participants perceive the group work, whether as positive or negative. Unlike the other two abstractions (learning and study-social function), organization includes the same aspects no matter what the experiences are, namely group composition , group structure , way of working and contributions.

Whether the group is composed in a homogeneous or heterogeneous way seems to be experienced in both a positive and negative sense. A well-thought-out group composition , including both group size and mix of members, is essential. A just large-enough group for the task, consisting of a population of members that is not too heterogeneous, facilitates a joyful experience and learning. A homogeneous mix of members might be perceived as positive, as the students feel that they have similar life situations, opinions, and skills, thereby causing positive conditions for collaboration within the group. Conversely, in a group with a heterogeneous mix, different members contribute with different knowledge and/or prior experiences, which can be used in the group for collective and collaborative learning. “Good group composition, distribution of age groups that leads to fruitful discussions.”

An additional facilitating prerequisite is that the group develops adequate ways of working together, which includes a well-organized group structure . Well-working groups are characterized as having developed adequate ways of working together, while groups that work less well together lack a developed way of cooperation. “Well-organized working group with clear and distinct rules and structure.” Preparation and attendance for group work are aspects mentioned as facilitating (and hampering) incitements. Group work in educational settings sometimes entails that you, as a student, are forced to read and learn within a certain period of time that is beyond your control. Some participants find the pressure positive, hence “increase the pressure to read chapters in time.” The members’ contribution to the group is also a central factor for the students’ apprehension of how the group works. This is, in short, about how much each member ought to contribute to the group and to the work. Groups considered to be well-working are ones where all members contribute to the group’s work, but the content of the contribution may vary according to the single member’s qualifications. “We work well together (most of us). Everybody participates in different ways and seems committed.” “Good, everybody participates the same amount. We complement each other well.”

The same prerequisites can lead to the reverse result, i.e., hampering learning and stirring up negative experiences. If the group members are too identical (a homogeneous group composition ), it might lead to a lack of opinions, which several participants perceived as being negative. “That we do not get a male perspective about the subject. We are all girls, at the age of 20, which also means that we have pretty much the same experiences that may be seen as both positive and negative. The negative is the lack of opinion.” If the group is considered to be too small, students seems to find it troublesome, as the relationships are few, but there are also few people who are available to handle the workload allotted to the group. Nevertheless, a group that is too large could also lead to negative experiences. “It is far too large a group.”

A lack of group structure might lead to a lower degree of satisfaction with the group’s way of working . A commonly expressed point of view seen in the students’ answers involved the occurrences of when all members did not attend the meetings (absence). In these cases, it was also viewed that the work in the group often was characterized as unstructured. “Sometimes a bit unclear structures, some students have difficulties with coming in time.” Not attending or coming unprepared or badly prepared to the group work is other aspect that is commented on. “Low degree of fellowship, punctuality is a problem, an insecure group.” Some students find it frustrating to prepare for a certain time decided that is beyond their control. “A necessity to read certain chapters within a specific period of time is never stimulating.”

One characteristic of groups that are not working well is that contribution varies among the members. In group work, students with different levels of ambition are assembled, which may result in different levels of interest and commitment, as well as differences in the willingness to take on responsibilities or part of the workload of the group’s work. Some members are active and do much of the work, while others barely contribute at all. “Some don’t do anything while others pull the heaviest burden. Two out of three prepare before the meeting, the rest think that they are able to read during the group work and do not supply the group with anything else other than delays and frustration.” A common answer seen in the questionnaires that concerns negative experiences of group work as they relate to contribution is: “Everybody does not contribute just as much.” or “There is always someone who just glides along and doesn’t take part.”

SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS

The results are summarized in a model illustrating the relationship between abstractions (i.e., learning, study-social function, and organization) and result (i.e., enhanced or reduced learning), as well as positive or negative experiences (see Figure ​ Figure1 1 ).

A model illustrating the relationship between abstractions and result .

The figure shows that all three abstractions may facilitate or hamper learning as well as the experiences of group work. To piece together, the difficult and extensive jigsaw puzzle concerning why some group work result in positive experiences and learning, while in other cases the result is the reverse is still not solved. In this article, we propose that the prerequisites learning, study-social function, and organization influence learning and experiences of working in group, thus, providing additional pieces of information to the jigsaw puzzle ( Figure ​ Figure2 2 ).

Pieces of jigsaw puzzle influence learning and experiences .

The current study focuses on university students’ experiences and conceptions of group work and learning in groups. A primary aim was to give university students a voice in the matter by elucidating the students’ positive and negative points of view, as well as how the students’ assess learning when working in groups. The analysis resulted in the emergence of three different abstractions: learning, study-social function, and organizations. Each abstraction also included a positive and a negative variant. In other words, all three abstractions either facilitated or hampered university students’ learning, as well as their experiences of group work.

LEARNING IN GROUP WORK

The result shows that the majority of the students (97%) experience that working in group facilitated learning, either academic knowledge, collaborative abilities or both, accordingly confirming previous research ( Johnson and Johnson, 2004 ; Baines et al., 2007 ; Gillies and Boyle, 2010 , 2011 ). According to the students, they learn more or different things when working in groups compared with working individually. Academic knowledge was not the only type of knowledge learned through group work. In addition to academic knowledge, students also gained advanced knowledge about how groups work, how the students function as individual members of groups and how other members behave and work in groups. Some of the respondents also argued that group work might strengthen the combination between empirical and theoretical learning, thus the students were learning about groups by working in groups. This implies that group work, from a learning perspective, serves several functions for the students ( Kutnick and Beredondini, 2009 ; Gillies and Boyle, 2010 , 2011 ; Hammar Chiriac, 2011a , b ). Group work also seems to have an important study-social function for the university students, hence confirming that group work serves more functions than just being a pedagogical mode.

Affiliation, fellowship, and welfare seem to be highly important, and may even be essential prerequisites for learning. Accordingly, group work functions as both as an objective (i.e., learning collaborative abilities), and as the means (i.e., a base for academic achievement), or both, for the students ( Gillies, 2003a , b ; Johnson and Johnson, 2004 ; Baines et al., 2007 ). Moreover, the students from the Bachelor’s Program in Biology and the students from the Program for Human Resources seem to use group work more as means for obtaining academic knowledge. In contrast, students from the Psychologist Program/Master of Science in Psychology and Social Work Program more often mentioned learning collaborative abilities alone, as well as a combination of academic knowledge and group learning, thus using group work as an objective, as a means, or as a combination of both. One interpretation might be that the type of task assigned to the students differs in various programs. This can be valid both concerning the purpose of group work (group work as objective or as the means), but also arrangement (working in a group or as a group; Underwood, 2003 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ). Another possible explanation might be that the main emphasis in the Bachelor’s Program in Biology and the Program for Human Resources is on product and academic knowledge, while in the Psychologist Program/Master of Science in Psychology and Social Work Program, the process is more articulated and demanded. However, this is only speculation and further research is needed.

Even though the participants did not explicitly state that group work hampered learning, they mentioned that they perceived group work to be ineffective due to the loss of focus and/or the presence of conflicts with other group members, thereby hampering conceivable learning. This may also be an effect of the purpose or arrangement of the group work ( Cantwell and Andrews, 2002 ; Underwood, 2003 ; Peterson and Miller, 2004 ; Hansen, 2006 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ; Hammar Chiriac and Hempel, 2013 ).

EXPERIENCES OF GROUP WORK

The results revealed that several aspects of group work are important incentives for learning. In addition, this study revealed students’ experiences of group work (i.e., facilitating or hampering positive/negative experiences), which is in line with the previous studies on students’ experiences of working in groups ( Cantwell and Andrews, 2002 ; Underwood, 2003 ; Peterson and Miller, 2004 ; Hansen, 2006 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ; Hammar Chiriac and Hempel, 2013 ). Group composition, group structure, ways of working, and participants’ contributions are aspects put forward by the university students as either facilitating or hampering the positive experience of group work ( Underwood, 2003 ; Peterson and Miller, 2004 ; Hansen, 2006 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ; Hammar Chiriac and Hempel, 2013 ).

Several of the aspects bear reference to whether the group members work in a group or as a group ( Underwood, 2003 ; Hammar Chiriac and Granström, 2012 ). Working as a group is characterized by common effort, utilization of the group’s competence, and includes problem solving and reflection. All group members are involved in and working on a common task to produce a joint outcome ( Bennet and Dunne, 1992 ; Galton and Williamson, 1992 ; Webb and Palincsar, 1996 ; Hammar Chiriac, 2011a , b ). According to the results, not all groups are working as a group but rather working in a group, which, according to Granström (2006) , is common in an educational setting.

Due to problems with group composition, members’ contributions, and group structure, including rules and ways of cooperation, some students end up with negative experiences of group work. Additionally, the university students allude to the fact that a well-functioning supportive study-social context is an essential prerequisite not only for positive experiences of group work, but also for learning ( Hammar Chiriac and Hempel, 2013 ). Both working in a group and working as group might be useful in different parts of the group work ( Hammar Chiriac, 2008 ) and cause learning. Hence working in a group causes cooperative learning based on social facilitation ( Zajonc, 1980 ; Baron, 1986 ; Uziel, 2007 ) while working as group causes learning benefits through collaboration with other group members. Although both approaches might cause positive or negative experiences, a conceivable interpretation is that working as a group has a greater potential to enhance positive experiences. The findings suggest a need for further research to fully understand why some group work causes positive experiences and other instances of group work cause negative experiences.

The findings in the current study develop the findings from Hammar Chiriac and Einarsson (2007) . First, it shows that it is possible to assemble all groups in to a joint research group (see below). Second, a thorough reanalysis, using an inductive qualitative content analysis, resulted in the emergence of three different abstractions: learning, study-social function, and organizations as either facilitating or hampering learning, and experiences.

METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS

There are some limitations in the current study and most of them have to do with the construction of the study-specific, semi-structured questionnaire. First, the questions do not discriminate between (a) the type of group work, (b) the purpose with the group work, (c) the structure of the group work (i.e., extent and/or time); or (d) ways of working in the group (i.e., cooperation or collaboration). Second, the design of the questionnaire does not facilitate comparison between the populations included in the group. The questionnaire treated group work as one activity and did not acknowledge that group work can serve different functions and include various activities ( Hammar Chiriac, 2008 ). This simplification of the phenomena group work causes criticism concerning whether or not it is possible to assemble these populations into a joint research group. An elaborated description of the analysis process and the comparison to three background variables has been used to counter this criticism. The thin results from the comparison, indicate that based on the question used in the study-specific questionnaire, it is possible to assemble the results into a corpus of joint results.

CONCLUSION/CONCLUDING REMARKS

The results indicate that most of the students’ experienced that group work facilitated learning, especially concerning academic knowledge. Three important prerequisites (learning, study-social function, and organization) for group work that serve as an effective pedagogy and as an incentive for learning were identified and discussed. All three abstractions either facilitated or hampered university students’ learning, as well as their experiences of group work. By listening to the university students’ voices and elucidating their experiences and conceptions, we have been able to add new knowledge and understanding of what the essence is behind successful group work in higher education. Furthermore, the students’ explanations of why some group work results in positive experiences and learning, while in other cases, the result is the opposite, can be of use for further development of group work as a pedagogical practice.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

The author acknowledges Ph.D. Faculty Program Director, Charlotta Einarsson, for her contribution to the design of this study and contribution to early stages of the data analysis and manuscript.

• American Psychological Association (APA). (2002). The Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct . Available at: http://www.apa.org/ethics/code2002.html [ Google Scholar ]
• Baines E., Blatchford P., Chowne A. (2007). Improving the effectiveness of collaborative group work in primary schools: effects on science attainment. Br. Educ. Res. J. 33 663–680 10.1080/01411920701582231 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barett M. (2007). “Practical and ethical issues in planning research,” in Research Methods in Psychology eds Breakell G., Hammond S., Fife-Schaw C., Smith J. A. (London: Sage Publications) 24–48 [ Google Scholar ]
• Baron R. S. (1986). Distraction-conflict theory: progress and problems. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 19 1–40 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60211-7 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bennet N., Dunne E. (1992). Managing Classroom Groups . Hemel Hempstead: Simon & Schuster Education [ Google Scholar ]
• Blatchford P., Kutnick P., Baines E., Galton M. (2003). Toward a social pedagogy of classroom group work. Int. J. Educ. Res. 39 153–172 10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00078-8 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Breakwell G. M, Hammond F., Fife-Schaw C., Smith J. A. (eds) (2006). Research Methods in Psychology . London: Sage Publications [ Google Scholar ]
• British Psychology Society (BPS). (2004). Code of Conduct, Ethical Principles, and Guidelines . Available at: http://www.bps.org.uk/document-download-area/document-download.cfm?file_uuid=6D0645CC-7E96-C67F-D75E2648E5580115&ext=pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• British Psychology Society (BPS). (2006). Code of Ethics and Conduct . Available at: http://www.bps.org.uk/the-society/code-of-conduct/code-of-conduct_home.cfm [ Google Scholar ]
• Bryman A. (2012). Social Research Methods . Oxford: University Press [ Google Scholar ]
• Cantwell R. H., Andrews B. (2002). Cognitive and psychological factors underlying secondary school students’ feeling towards group work. Educ. Psychol. 22 75–91 10.1080/01443410120101260 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elo S, Kyngäs H. (2007). The qualitative content analysis process. J. Adv. Nurs. 62 107–115 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Galton M., Williamson J. (1992). Group Work in the Primary Classroom . London: Routledge [ Google Scholar ]
• Galton M. J., Hargreaves L., Pell T. (2009). Group work and whole-class teaching with 11–14-years-old compared. Cambridge J. Educ . 39 119–147 10.1080/03057640802701994 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gillies R. M. (2003a). The behaviours, interactions, and perceptions of junior high school students during small-group learning. J. Educ. Psychol. 95 137–147 10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.137 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gillies R. M. (2003b). Structuring cooperative group work in classrooms. Int. J. Educ. Res. 39 35–49 10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00072-7 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gillies R. M., Boyle M. (2010). Teachers’ reflections on cooperative learning: Issues of implementation. Teach. Teach. Educ. 26 933–940 10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.034 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gillies R. M., Boyle M. (2011). Teachers’ reflections on cooperative learning (CL): a two-year follow-up. Teach. Educ. 1 63–78 10.1080/10476210.2010.538045 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Graneheim U. H., Lundman B. (2003). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ. Today 24 105–112 10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Granström K. (2006). “Group phenomena and classroom management in Sweden,” in Handbook of Classroom Management: Research, Practice, and Contemporary Issues eds Evertson C. M., Weinstein C. S. (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum) 1141–1160 [ Google Scholar ]
• Hammar Chiriac E. (2008). A scheme for understanding group processes in problem-based learning. High. Educ. 55 505–518 10.1007/s10734-007-9071-7 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hammar Chiriac E. (2010). “Group work is not one, but a great many processes – understanding group work dynamics,” in Group Theory: Classes, Representation and Connections, and Applications ed. Danellis C. W. (New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.) 153–166 [ Google Scholar ]
• Hammar Chiriac E. (2011a). Research on Group Work in Education . New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc [ Google Scholar ]
• Hammar Chiriac E. (2011b). “Research on group work in education,” in Emerging Issues in Compulsory Education [Progress in Education. Volume 20] ed Nata R. (New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.) 25–44 [ Google Scholar ]
• Hammar Chiriac E., Einarsson C. (2007). “Is the grass greener in the other group? Students’ experiences of group-work” [“är gräset grönare i den andra gruppen? Studenters erfarenheter av grupparbete”] [Published in Swedish], in Interaction on the Edge 2. Proceedings from the 5th GRASP Conference ed. Näslund J. (Linköping: Linköping University) [ Google Scholar ]
• Hammar Chiriac E, Granström K. (2012). Teachers’ leadership and students’ experience of group work. Teach. Teach. Theor. Pract. 3 345–363 10.1080/13540602.2012.629842 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hammar Chiriac E., Hempel A. (2013), Handbook for Group Work [Published in Swedish: Handbok för grupparbete – att skapa fungerande grupper i undervisningen] . Lund: Studentlitteratur [ Google Scholar ]
• Hansen R. S. (2006). Benefits and problems with student teams: suggestions for improving team projects. J. Educ. Bus. 82 11–19 10.3200/JOEB.82.1.11-19 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnson D. W., Johnson R. T. (1975). Learning Together and Alone. Cooperative, Competitive and Individualistic Learning (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall) [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnson D. W., Johnson R. T. (2004). Assessing Students in Groups: Promoting Group Responsibility and Individual Accountability . Thousand Oaks: Sage [ Google Scholar ]
• Kutnick P., Beredondini L. (2009). Can the enhancement of group work in classrooms provide a basis for effective communication in support of school-based cognitive achievement in classrooms of young learners? Cambridge J. Educ . 39 71–94 10.1080/03057640902836880 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lou Y., Abrami P. C., Spence J. C., Poulsen C., Chambers B, d’Apllonia S. (1996). Within-class grouping: a meta analysis. Rev. Educ. Res. 66 423–458 10.3102/00346543066004423 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mayring P. (2000). Qualitative Content Analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social Research 1:2 . Available at: http://qualitative-research.net/fqs/fqs-e/2-00inhalt-e.htm_140309 [ Google Scholar ]
• Näslund J. (2013). “Pupils’ and students’ view on group work” [Published in Swedish: Elevers och studenters syn på grupparbete] in Handbook for Group Work [Published in Swedish: Handbok för grupparbete – att skapa fungerande grupper i undervisningen] eds Hammar Chiriac E., Hempel A. (Lund: Studentlitteratur) 233–242 [ Google Scholar ]
• Peterson S, Miller J. A. (2004). Quality of college students’ experiences during cooperative learning. Soc. Psychol. Learn. 7 161–183 [ Google Scholar ]
• Underwood J. D. M. (2003). Student attitudes towards socially acceptable and unacceptable group working practices. Br. J. Psychol. 94 319–337 10.1348/000712603767876253 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Uziel L. (2007). Individual differences in the social facilitation effect: a review and meta-analysis. J. Res. Person. 41 579–601 10.1016/j.jrp.2006.06.008 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Webb N. M., Palincsar A. S. (1996). “Group processes in the classroom,” in Handbook of Educational Psychology eds Berliner D. C., Calfee R. C. (New York: Macmillan) 841–873 [ Google Scholar ]
• Zajonc R. B. (1980). “Compresence,” in Psychology of Group Influence ed. Paulus P. B. (New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum) 35–60 [ Google Scholar ]

• Entertainment
• Environment
• Information Science and Technology
• Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Life Work

Navigating Academic Challenges: Benefits of Group Work 

*minimum deadline

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below

• Spring Break
• Life Changing Experience

Related Essays

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

• INTERPERSONAL SKILLS
• Team Working, Groups and Meetings

6 Benefits of Group Work

Search SkillsYouNeed:

Interpersonal Skills:

• A - Z List of Interpersonal Skills
• Interpersonal Skills Self-Assessment
• Communication Skills
• Emotional Intelligence
• Team-Working, Groups and Meetings
• An Introduction to Groups and Teams
• Group Processes
• Group Life-Cycle
• Group Roles
• Group Diversity
• Group Dynamics
• Group Decision-Making
• Groups Strengths and Weaknesses
• Building Group Cohesiveness
• Difficult Group Behaviour
• Peer Resistance
• Effective Team-Working
• Collaboration or Working Together
• Collaborative Innovation
• Joining an Established Team
• Joining an Established Team as Manager
• Team Building
• Ice Breaker Exercises
• Managing Remote Teams
• Working with Others Remotely: Building and Maintaining Relationships
• Rebuilding Teams After Remote Working
• Planning and Structuring Effecting Meetings
• Conducting a Meeting
• Agenda-Setting for Meetings
• The Role of the Secretary
• Remote Meetings and Presentations
• Managing Difficult Behaviour in Meetings
• Mindful Meetings

The SkillsYouNeed Guide to Interpersonal Skills

• Decision-Making and Problem-Solving
• Negotiation and Persuasion Skills

Subscribe to our FREE newsletter and start improving your life in just 5 minutes a day.

You'll get our 5 free 'One Minute Life Skills' and our weekly newsletter.

We'll never share your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Working on your own can sometimes feel easier. It can be efficient, you can work on the project in your own time, and you can control the whole processes.

There are some good reasons to get involved in group work, though. Whether it’s forced upon you by your teacher or boss, or it’s a study group you arrange with your friends, group work can be useful in helping you to deepen your knowledge and understanding of issues.

Below, I outline six top benefits of group work.

1. You get a variety of perspectives

Working in a group enables you to examine topics from the perspectives of others. When you are required to discuss a topic and negotiate how to address it, you are forced to listen to other people’s ideas. Their ideas will then influence your own thinking and broaden your horizons. Your group members aren’t just fellow learners, they’re also your teachers.

The point of group work is that being social significantly enhances learning. Not only do you have to hear others’ perspectives, you also have to compare, contrast and integrate their perspectives into your own thinking. Perhaps someone else’s perspective will change your mind or show weaknesses in your own ideas. Only through engaging with others can your perspectives change.

The point here is not to simply change your perspective, but also to sharpen it. Your team members are not opponents whose minds you want to change. They are collaborators on a project in which you are collectively trying to develop a shared understanding of a topic in which the group’s final, shared, perspective is sharper, richer and more dynamic as a result of the collaboration. Group work is great for improving your critical thinking skills and making you a sharper thinker.

So, the next time you work in a group remember this: listen to others’ perspectives and see how their views can sharpen your own. Remember your view is malleable and should change as a result of the interaction. By the end of the group process, you’ll be smarter and more insightful than you were at the start.

2. You improve your vocabulary

In second language learning, interactions with others is widely accepted as the best way to learn. You’ll often hear English language teachers talk about situated learning. This is when a learner of English is thrown into a social situation and forced to interact in English in order to successfully navigate the social situation. The point of this task is to force the learner how language works in real life.

You may not realise it, but the same goes for you in all group work situations. Even if English is your first language, when you’re forced to interact with others you learn how they speak about a topic more effectively. You will learn words and phrases that are effective at explaining a phenomenon, and you’ll learn to discard the words and phrases that seem ineffective in explaining your point of view to others.

By the end of the group work process, you might start explaining concepts in a new way. You might also integrate new words and phrases into your explanations of topics. Imagine if, at the end of a group project, you presented the topic to a class or teacher and started using words and phrases you never would have thought of before working in a group. Your teacher will be impressed by your improved vocabulary and you’ll be on your way to increasing your grades.

3. You learn to teach

Sometimes you’re the expert in the group. This can be frustrating if you don’t have the right mindset about the topic. However, being the most knowledgeable person in a group does not mean you won’t get a lot out of group work.

Being the teacher within a group requires you to refine your knowledge. Even if you think you know all of what needs to be known, you will still need to be able to organize that knowledge enough to teach it to people in a way that makes sense to them.

As a part of the process of teaching information to your peers, you will find you need to break concepts down into easy-to-manage steps. Jerome Bruner used the term ‘ scaffolding ’ to explain how a teacher presents information in bite-sized chunks. You’ll keep delivering little bits of information until the learner has built up all of the knowledge to fully understand a topic on their own.

So, even if you’re more knowledgeable than your team members, you’re still going to get a lot out of group work. It will sharpen your understanding of a topic and make you even more of an expert than you were before!

4. You learn to manage personalities

One of the major reasons many people scoff at group work is that you have to work with people you might clash with.

This might not necessarily only be because you have personality differences. You may also have competing learning preferences . If one group member is a quiet, bookish and introverted learner and another is a boisterous and chatty learner, there might be a clash of learning approaches. This can cause problems in a group.

The path through this challenge is to change your mindset. If you’re in a group that has personality clashes, view the group learning scenario as your chance to develop the valuable real-life skill of managing people. It’s an essential skill for workplace cohesion, but also in your real life: most families experience competing personalities every thanksgiving dinner!

Taking the reins in a group work situation and finding a path through competing personalities makes you a much better people person. Some paths through such a challenge could include setting rotating team roles.

Team roles could include: note taker, timekeeper, resource investigator, and coordinator. The note taker can ensure everything that gets discussed is written down; the timekeeper ensures the group stays on task and completes all tasks on time, the resource investigator uses the internet and library to gather deeper information for the team and the coordinator ensures all team members’ opinions are heard. Try to rotate these roles each time the group meets.

5. You can leverage talent

We often find we have different skillsets to our friends. In fact, we may have different approaches to learning as well! This diversity of skills can be a huge benefit of group work.

Your interactions with team members who are more talented at certain tasks give you an opportunity for self-improvement. The team member who is excellent at creatively putting together group presentations can give the whole group tips on how to improve the final product. The team member who is gifted at research can support the group in gathering data for enhancing the group’s mission.

Keep in mind that your goal should not be to delegate the creative tasks to the creative person and the research tasks to the research guru. Your goal should be to have the experts in the group teach other members of the group strategies to get better at their areas of talent.

If you use group work as an opportunity to observe and learn from the talents of others, you’ll end up with greater skills than if you did the project in isolation. Embrace the opportunity to learn from peers, see their unique talents, and pick up on their strategies. Whether it’s a new study tip or insights into how to be a better public speaker, keep your eye out for these opportunities to learn from your talented team members.

6. You learn to negotiate

One of the most frustrating things about group work for me is that sometimes the final product of the group project is not exactly what I want. It’s hard for a perfectionist to see ideas and perspectives in a final group assessment submission that you don’t agree are the best.

However, this outcome is a desirable aspect of group work that’s built into the process. Allowing someone else’s ideas to be a part of a shared project leads to shared ownership. Everyone needs to see a little bit of themselves in the final product of the group work process.

The idea of give-and-take in group work is explained by the term ‘positive interdependence’. Positive interdependence loosely means that the group sinks or swims together. If your group members’ ideas are not included in the group discussion, their motivation will decrease and you will find they begin to put less effort in. This will hurt the group in the long run. It’s therefore useful to ensure your peers feel they have some ownership over the group discussion. This ensures group cohesion and makes sure the group sustains its motivation to learn in the long run. As this study found , groups that embrace positive interdependence tend to end up succeeding more than groups that lack a sense of being ‘in it together’.

Negotiation and compromise are necessities of life. Getting your own way shouldn’t be the goal of a group project. Putting the group first teaches you something: it teaches you about the importance of community, interdependence and tolerance. These values are the soft emotional intelligence skills that will make you a better listener, colleague and learner.

Further Reading from Skills You Need

Understanding and Developing Emotional Intelligence

Learn more about emotional intelligence and how to effectively manage personal relationships at home, at work and socially.

Our eBooks are ideal for anyone who wants to learn about or develop their interpersonal skills and are full of easy-to-follow, practical information.

Final Thoughts

Even if group work gives you nightmares, try to focus on the positives. It is a very useful method of learning and developing new products. This is why universities and workplaces employ group work scenarios regularly. Groups that are effective help you not only develop better final products and learn more deeply, they teacher you soft skills and emotional intelligence that will serve you well for life.

Next time you get involved in a group scenario, keep your focus on how your group can be beneficial for your learning and development:

• You get a variety of perspectives
• You improve your vocabulary
• You learn to teach
• You learn to manage personalities
• You can leverage talent
• You learn to negotiate

About the Author

Chris Drew has a PhD in Education and teaches Teacher Education at university level. He is the founder of the blog HelpfulProfessor.com and is the voice behind the Essay Guidance Study Skills podcast. You can join his free personal tutor service by heading over to his website.

Continue to: Working in Groups and Teams Critical Thinking Skills

See also: Understanding Other People Group Diversity Group Cohesiveness

Implementing Group Work in the Classroom

Group work can be an effective method to motivate students, encourage active learning, and develop key critical-thinking, communication, and decision-making skills. But without careful planning and facilitation, group work can frustrate students and instructors, and feel like a waste of time. Use these suggestions to help implement group work successfully in your classroom.

Preparing for Group Work

• Think carefully about how students will be physically arranged in groups.  Will it be easy for groups to form and for all students to be comfortable? Also think about how the layout of your classroom will impact volume. Will students be able to hear one another clearly? How can you moderate the activity to control volume?

Set clear guidelines on professional, civil conduct  between and among students to respect people’s differences and create an inclusive environment.

Talk to students about their past experiences with group work  and allow them to establish some ground rules for successful collaboration. This discussion can be successfully done anonymously through the use of note cards.

Designing the Group Activity

• Identify the instructional objectives.  Determine what you want to achieve through the small group activity, both academically (e.g., knowledge of a topic) and socially (e.g., listening skills). The activity should relate closely to the learning objective(s) and class content, and must be designed to help students learn, not simply to occupy their time. When deciding whether or not to use group work for a specific task, consider these questions: What is the objective of the activity? How will that objective be furthered by asking students to work in groups? Is the activity challenging or complex enough that it requires group work? Will the project require true collaboration? Is there any reason why the assignment should not be collaborative?
• Make the task challenging.  Consider giving a relatively easy task early in the term to arouse students’ interest in group work and encourage their progress. In most cases collaborative exercises should be stimulating and challenging. By pooling their resources and dealing with differences of opinion that arise, groups of students can develop a more sophisticated product than they could as individuals. See our teaching tip “ Group work in the Classroom: Small-Group Tasks ” for some ideas.
• Allocate essential resources across the group so that group members are required to share information (e.g., the  jigsaw method ). Or, to come up with a consensus, randomly select one person to speak for the group, or assign different roles to group members so that they are all involved in the process (e.g., recorder, spokesperson, summarizer, checker, skeptic, organizer, observer, timekeeper, conflict resolver, liaison to other groups).
• Another strategy for promoting interdependence is specifying common rewards for the group, such as a group mark. See the CTE teaching tip “ Methods for Assessing Group Work ” for more information.
• Decide on group size.  The size you choose will depend on the number of students, the size of the classroom, the variety of voices needed within a group, and the task assigned. Groups of four-five tend to balance the needs for diversity, productivity, active participation, and cohesion. The less skillful the group members, the smaller the groups should be (Gross Davis, 1993).
• To vary group composition and increase diversity within groups, randomly assign students to groups by counting off and grouping them according to number. 
• For some group tasks, the diversity within a group (e.g., gender, ethnicity, level of preparation) is especially important, and you might want to assign students to groups yourself before class. Collect a data card from each student on the first day of class to glean important information about their backgrounds, knowledge, and interests. Alternately, ask students to express a preference (e.g., list three students with whom they would most like to work or two topics they would most like to study), and keep their preferences in mind as you assign groups.
• Allow sufficient time for group work.  Recognize that you won't be able to cover as much material as you could if you lectured for the whole class period. Cut back on the content you want to present in order to give groups time to work. Estimate the amount of time that subgroups need to complete the activity. Also plan for a plenary session in which groups’ results can be presented or general issues and questions can be discussed.
• Design collaborative work in multiple forms:  pairs, small groups, large groups, online synchronously, online asynchronously, etc. Some students might be better at contributing after they have had time to digest material, while others might be better at thinking on the spot. Other students will defer to others in large groups but actively contribute in pairs. All roles should be valued and included.

Introducing the Group Activity

• Share your rationale for using group work.  Students must understand the benefits of collaborative learning. Don't assume that students know what the pedagogical purpose is. Explicitly connect these activities to larger class themes and learning outcomes whenever possible. 
• Have students form groups before you give them instructions.  If you try to give instructions first, students may be too preoccupied with deciding on group membership to listen to you. 
• Facilitate some form of group cohesion.  Students work best together if they know or trust each other, at least to some extent. Even for brief group activities, have students introduce themselves to their group members before attending to their task. For longer periods of group work, consider introducing an  icebreaker  or an activity designed specifically to build a sense of teamwork.
• Explain the task clearly.  This means both telling students exactly what they have to do and describing what the final product of their group work will look like. Explaining the big picture or final goal is important, especially when the group work will take place in steps (such as in  snowballing or jigsaw ). Prepare written or visual instructions (e.g., charts, sequential diagrams) for students. Remember to include time estimations for activities. 
• Set ground rules for group interaction.  Especially for extended periods of group work, establish how group members should interact with one another, including principles such as respect, active listening, and methods for decision making. Consider making a group contract. See  Group Decision Making , a CTE teaching tip prepared for students working in groups, and  Making Group Contracts .
• Let students ask questions.  Even if you believe your instructions are crystal clear, students may have legitimate questions about the activity. Give them time to ask questions before they get to work.

Monitoring the Group Task

• Monitor the groups but do not hover.  As students do their work, circulate among the groups and answer any questions raised. Also listen for trends that are emerging from the discussions, so that you can refer to them during the subsequent plenary discussion. Avoid interfering with group functioning — allow time for students to solve their own problems before getting involved. You might consider leaving the room for a short period of time. Your absence can increase students’ willingness to share uncertainties and disagreements (Jaques, 2000).
• Be slow to share what you know.  If you come upon a group that is experiencing uncertainty or disagreement, avoid the natural tendency to give the answers or resolve the disagreement. If necessary, clarify your instructions, but let students struggle — within reason — to accomplish the task (Race, 2000).
• Clarify your role as facilitator.  If students criticize you for not contributing enough to their work, consider whether you have communicated clearly enough your role as facilitator.

Ending the Group Task

Provide closure to the group activities.  Students tend to want to see how their work in small groups was useful to them and/or contributed to the development of the topic. You can end with a plenary session in which students do group reporting. Effective group reporting “can make the difference between students’ feeling that they are just going through their paces and the sense that they are engaged in a powerful exchange of ideas” (Brookfield & Preskill, 1999, p. 107).

• Oral reports:  Have each group give one idea and rotate through the groups until no new ideas arise. Or have each group give their most surprising or illuminating insights or their most challenging question. You can record ideas raised to validate their value.
• Written reports:  Have each group record their ideas and either present them yourself or have a group member do so. One variation on this is to have groups record their conclusions on a section of the blackboard or on flipchart paper that is then posted on the wall. Students then informally circulate around the room and read each other’s answers. Alternately, you can ask students to move around the room in small groups, rotating from one set of comments to another and adding their own comments in response. Another variation on written reports is to have students write brief comments on Post-it notes or index cards. Collect them, take a few minutes to process them or put them in sequence, then summarize their contents.
• Model how you want students to participate.  When responding to students’ answers, model the respect and sensitivity that you want the students to display towards their classmates. Be ready to acknowledge and value opinions different from your own. Be willing to share your own stories, critique your work, and summarize what has been said.
• Connect the ideas raised to course content and objectives.  Recognize that groups might not come up with the ideas you intended them to, so be willing to make your lecture plans flexible. Wherever possible, look for a connection between group conclusions and the course topic. However, be aware that misconceptions or inaccurate responses need to be clarified and corrected either by you or by other students.
• Don’t provide too much closure.  Although the plenary session should wrap up the group work, feel free to leave some questions unanswered for further research or for the next class period. This openness reflects the nature of knowledge.
• Ask students to reflect on the group work process.  They may do so either orally or in writing. This reflection helps them discover what they learned and how they functioned in the group. It also gives you a sense of their response to group work.

If you would like support applying these tips to your own teaching, CTE staff members are here to help.  View the  CTE Support  page to find the most relevant staff member to contact.

• Brookfield, S.D., & Preskill, S. (1999).  Discussion as a Way of Teaching: Tools and Techniques for Democratic Classrooms.  San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
• Gross Davis, B. (1993).  Tools for Teaching.  San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
• Jaques, D. (2000).  Learning in Groups: A Handbook for Improving Group Work, 3rd ed.  London: Kogan Page.
• Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (2014). Cooperative learning: Improving university instruction by basing practice on validated theory.  Journal on Excellence in College Teaching , 25(3&4), 85-118.
• Race, P. (2000).  500 Tips on Group Learning.  London: Kogan Page.
• Roberson, B., & Franchini, B. (2014). Effective task design for the TBL classroom. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3&4), 275-302.

CTE teaching tips

• Group Work in the Classroom: Small-Group Tasks
• Group Work in the Classroom: Types of Small Groups
• Making Group Contracts
• Methods for Assessing Group Work

Other resources

• Journal on Excellence in College Teaching (2014). Special Focus Issue:  Small-Group Learning in Higher Education — Cooperative, Collaborative, Problem-Based, and Team-Based Learning .
• Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., and Smith, K.A. (2006).  Active learning: Cooperation in the university classroom  (3 rd  edition). Edina, MN: Interaction. 
• Silberman, M. (1996).  Active Learning: 101 Strategies to Teach Any Subject.  Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Catalog search

Teaching tip categories.

• Assessment and feedback
• Blended Learning and Educational Technologies
• Career Development
• Course Design
• Course Implementation
• Inclusive Teaching and Learning
• Learning activities
• Support for Student Learning
• Support for TAs
• Course Implementation ,

Home — Essay Samples — Sociology — Social Learning Theory — Importancece and Benefits of Team Working for Students

Importancece and Benefits of Team Working for Students

• Categories: Social Learning Theory Social Psychology Teamwork

About this sample

Words: 406 |

Published: Mar 28, 2019

Words: 406 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Karlyna PhD

Verified writer

• Expert in: Sociology Psychology Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 1094 words

2 pages / 925 words

1 pages / 634 words

2 pages / 795 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Social learning theory, developed by Albert Bandura in the 1960s, is a psychological theory that emphasizes the importance of observational learning, vicarious reinforcement, and modeling in shaping human behavior. This essay [...]

Bandura's social learning theory proposes that behavior change is achieved through observation, imitation, and modeling. The theory suggests that learning is influenced by role models, attitudes, and anticipated outcomes. It [...]

Eating disorders afflict millions of Americans, and they are serious, even life-threatening. They are classified as psychiatric disorders, and actually have little to do with food, but rather with underlying issues of [...]

Owner the theory of social learning (Bandura) finds that the person learns by observing the behavior of others or of social media and observing their actions, words and do it like them afterwards. For example, a young child [...]

In order to learn how to behave, one needs to sometimes learn through observational learning. This is emphasized Albert Bandura' social learning theory where humans learn new behaviors by observing and imitating others and by [...]

The value and systems theory can be used to analyze and identify the management, operations, and the strategic issues facing an organization. The evaluation in the lens of the Memes stack principles enables the researcher to [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Teacher For Inclusion

Teaching teachers tips, subscribe to my newsletter to receive a free novel kit & updates on my latest products.

February 1, 2021

5 Benefits of Group Writing Exercises You Must Know!

Group Writing Exercises

Group Writing Exercises will benefit students in practice with collaboration, building teamwork skills, support from classmates, quality work over quantity work, more focus from teacher . What is a group essay assignment? or What is group essay writing? They are the same process as how to write a 5 paragraph essay with the exception of doing it in a group. The focus of this blog will be the literary analysis essay (Lesson on Teachers Pay Teachers).

How to write a writing plan for essay is the most important steps to writing an essay. If you do not plan properly it can be a chaotic waste of time. Prior to writing or beginning an essay students receive graphic organizers to fill in about the steps in the essay process. We watch videos as students fill out their graphic organizers. We cover all the parts of the essay process: attention getter, summary of essay, thesis statement, topic sentences, transitions, evidence, commentary, concluding sentence, and writing a conclusion. Schmoop or John Green videos are an engaging and effective way to cover each of these topics . They have short entertaining videos that hold students attention long enough to learn about a less than enthusiastic topic such as transitions . They truly do a great job. If I have a lot of students who are in special education , in the process for how to plan a writing group I decide if I want to allow them to use head phones and work independently on this part of the process. This way they can pause, rewind, or forward the videos as many times as necessary to really grasp what each part of the essay process is and to allow time to fill in their graphic organizers, which they will next be taking to their assigned group.

Collaboration and Teamwork are Key to How to Write a Good Essay

The first of 5 benefits of writing in groups is collaboration. It needs to be strategic collaboration . I strategically place students in assigned groups when I begin how to plan for a writing group. An example of being strategic would be to not put three extremely shy students in one group, or not putting three students who do not typically work in the same group. The second of the 5 benefits of writing in a group is honing teamwork skills. If you do not set the teams up strategically, they will not work well as a team. It’s crucial to place them into groups of 3. The reason I choose groups of three is so that each student will be given the task of writing a body paragraph and there are three body paragraphs. They also cannot skate by on someone else’s work. In addition the pressure of your grade being a contributing factor in the group’s grade as a whole is enough to encourage full participation and effort. During this assignment, I receive more tutorial visits from students than any other time of the year. Students do not like letting their peers down, nor feeling like they do not fit in. I give them as much support as they need until they get their paper to the level that they want.

Once students are in groups they will be given a poster paper and colored pencils. Color coding will allow them to see the different parts of the essay clearly. It will also provide clarity for the different parts of the essay when they share with their classmates. They will be color coding the introduction: attention-getter, summary of essay, and thesis statement.  Once settled into their group the real work begins. We review themes from the novel-as they were covered throughout the unit and students already have a completed graphic organizer for theme.  I use videos to cover the theme from a novel. These are short entertaining videos from Pixar, or created by students in a video class that the kids love and remember. An example would be “Family heritage defines perception in “To Kill a Mockingbird”, and a short Pixar video I show is called, “Snack Attack “, where an elderly woman’s perspective of a young teen is grossly skewed. It isn’t until the end of the video that she realizes that what she perceived as disrespectful behavior was actually respectful behavior.

Group Writing Exercises: Support of Classmates

The group decides on a theme for the essay. The theme is chosen from the novel we have completed. It’s important that they have a clear picture of what the theme means in relation to the novel in order to complete a successful essay.  The third of the 5 benefits of writing in a group is the support students receive from their classmates. For example, students are less likely to choose a theme that isn’t going to work for a 5 paragraph essay, because it has to pass through three students for approval. From there they write a thesis statement in color on their poster paper. In writing their thesis statement they add an opinion to the theme. It’s essential to choose an opinion and theme for which they can find several pieces of evidence to back up this theme plus opinion. An exercise that can take place at this stage in the essay process is to have them look up three pieces of evidence that will back up their thesis statement. This is to ensure essay success because if they cannot prove their thesis statement, they will not be successful in writing the essay.

At this point I put up all posters around the room and pass out sticky notes for each group. They will now perform a gallery walk where they write four comments on sticky notes for each poster. They are to write two things they like about the thesis statement, and two suggestions. Once they have completed the gallery walk, posters are returned to groups, and groups are to share their thesis, comments, and are to then improve their thesis statement.

The next step is to write an attention-getter, which can be one of three things: an interesting fact or statistic that relates to the topic; a famous quote that relates to the topic; an anecdote, a short story about themselves that relate to the topic . If they are to write an interesting fact, statistic, or quote, they are to look it up and site it correctly. If they write an anecdote , I provide a prompt to support them through the process. An example of a prompt would be, “tell me about a time you were sure of something, even argued about it, and later found out you were wrong. What did that look like, describe how you felt when you learned you were wrong. What did you learn from the experience?” Students would then share these stories with each other and a couple would share out with the class. This would be in keeping with the theme about perception. In the groups they would choose the best story and use it as an anecdote: attention-getter.

Tips for Writing an Essay: Quality Over Quantity

From there they will write their introduction together as a group. Students will then write the topic sentence for each body paragraph as a group. In addition they will review the parts of a body paragraph as a group. At this point each student will choose the body paragraph they want to complete independently. The 4 out of 5 benefits of writing in a group is that there is quality over quantity. More often than not, students will spend the evening prior to due date, putting together a 5 paragraph essay. Only having the task of writing one body paragraph , ensures quality work over quantity. It’s important to have this part of the group essay project be independent to ensure two things: that students understand how to write a body paragraph independently and to ensure all students are participating in the essay. Once students have completed their body paragraphs, they share them with the group and the group works collaboratively to revise as necessary.

Group Writing Exercises: How to Write the Conclusion

The next step for the group essay process is to write the conclusion as a group. The conclusion is a simple process because they repeat the thesis statement in different words, repeat all topic sentences in different words, and write a lesson learned in the essay process. The introduction and the conclusion can go on the poster and typed versions of the body paragraphs can be attached to the poster. The fifth out of 5 benefits of writing in groups is that there is more focus from the teacher. A teacher who typically has 140 students, will now be able to support 45 during the essay process.

Group Writing Exercises: How to Organize Peer-Editing

Students will then exchange essays and perform a peer edit. In order to complete a successful peer edit, I provide a worksheet that gives step-by-step instructions. These are passed back to the group who make changes as they see fit. Students create a polished copy of a new poster for the introduction and the conclusion as well as each group member revising their body paragraphs. Once they have this all together, I collect them, grade them with a rubric and post them around the room. Student names are on the back of the poster for those who are painfully shy about their work being displayed. A final step can be a prompt for a individual reflection: what worked, what didn’t work, and how to change things for next time.

In this blog post we went over a step-by-step process in how to plan a writing group. If you follow these steps, you will have a successful, collaborative, essay process. As mentioned in the introduction it is crucial to plan in advance in order for this to work. If you do not plan, it will be a chaotic waste of time. The plan includes: graphic organizers and videos for each step in the essay process, assigning groups, walking students through the introduction step-by-step. Planning for a gallery walk. An instructional sheet for the essay, a peer edit form, rubric, and self reflection sheet. How to write a reflection on a group work essay? Have them write one independently and as a group. If you put this plan into place you will have an effective lesson that students have the opportunity to work on collaboratively and cooperatively . Let me know how you plan group writing in the comments below! If you enjoyed this article and want to learn more about writing essays, take a look at me How to Write a Narrative Essay blog post.

Share this:

Leave a reply cancel reply, popular posts, 5 characteristics of graphic novels you must know, teaching theme using short films, teaching tolerance classroom must-haves, recent posts, teach the seventh most important thing shelley pearsall, teach jason reynold’s when i was the greatest, back to school: essential tips for a successful start, shop resources.

Email List Sign Up

Discover more from teacher for inclusion.

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading