Team-Based Learning
The Impact of Team Collaboration Software on Individual Learning Outcomes
Keywords:
Team Collaboration Software, Technology, Learning outcomes, Computer literacy, Meyers BriggsAbstract
Problem: Insufficient knowledge exists about the influence of student collaboration on individual learning outcomes, especially within online learning environments.
Research Questions: What impact does student collaboration (defined as teams of three students) have on individual learning outcomes within a beginning computer literacy course? How do learning gains for these collaborating students compare with gains for students who do not collaborate? Are student personality preferences, as indicated by the Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), correlated with student gain scores?
Research Method: An experimental design with treatment and controls groups and pre/post testing was used to determine the significance of learning gains for students collaborating in teams of three.
Data Collection Procedures and Analysis: Data was collected from six sections of an introductory computer literacy course during the 2013-14 academic year. A t-test was used to analyze the gain scores of collaborative student learning compared to individual student learning.
Findings: Results indicate a statistically significant positive difference in gain scores (p 5 0.029) of students learning collaboratively in an online environment compared to students learning individually in an online environment. In addition, a statistically significant difference in mean gain scores (p 5 0.011) was found for collaborating students with the MBTI personality preference of Sensing and Intuition.
Conclusions/Recommendations: Our research results suggest that students who learn collaboratively online in teams of three students outperform students who learn online as individuals. Based on our results, we suggest the following as means to promote both collaboration skills and individual student learning outcomes within online learning environments: A. Shifting course format from solely individual activities to a balance of individual and collaborative activities. B. Forming small teams of three to four students as a form of collaboration to best impact individual learning outcomes. C. Matching the personality preference of students with the appropriate learning environments (collaborative and individual). Intuitive learners seem to especially benefit from the unique learning opportunities provided by online courses.
Downloads
References
Aggarwal, P., & O’Brien, C. L. (2008). Social loafing on group projects. Journal of Marketing Education, 30, 255–264.
Apedoe, X., Ellefson, M., & Schunn, C. (2012). Learning Together While Designing: Does Group Size Make a Difference? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(1), 83-94.
Bernard, R. M., Rojo de Rubalvaca, B., & St-Pierre, D., (2000). Collaborative online distance learning: Issues for future practice and research. Distance Education, 21(2), 260–277.
Brandon, D. P., & Hollingshead, A.B. (1999). Collaborative learning and computer supported groups, Communication Education, 48(2), 109–26.
Brindley, J. E., & Walti, C. (June 2009). Creating effective collaborative learning groups in on online environment. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(3), 1–19.
Brown, H. F. (2012). Technological trends affecting the business education curriculum and instruction. Trends & Issues in Business Education: 2012 Yearbook, 50, 89-105.
Capdeferro, N., & Romero, M. (April 2012). Are online learners frustrated with collaborative learning experiences? The International Review of Research In Open and Distance Learning, 13(2), 26–44.
Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by ‘collaborative learning?’ In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative-learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches (pp. 1–19). Oxford, England.
Elsevier, P. G. (2012). Collaborative learning activities in online courses: issues and strategies. ASEAN Journal of Open Distance Learning, (1), 1-16.
Fichter, D. (2005). The many forms of e-collaboration: blogs, wikis, portals, groupware, discussion boards, and instant messaging. Online, 29(4), 48–50.
Garrison, D. (2006). Online collaboration principles. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 10(1). 25-34.
Goold, A., Craig, A., & Coldwell, J. (2008). The student experience of working in teams online. Retrieved on May 20, 2013 from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/melbourne08/procs/goold.pdf
Graves, D. (1976). Let’s get rid of the welfare mess in the teaching of writing. Language Arts, 53, 645-651.
Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (2005). The evolution of online learning and the revolution in higher education. Communications of the ACM, 48(10), 59–64.
Jahng, N., & Bullen, M. 2012. Exploring Group Forming Strategies by Examining Participation Behaviours during Whole Class Discussions. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 1.
Johnson, C. M. (2001). A survey of current research on online communities of practice. Internet and Higher Education, 4(1), 45–60
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R.T., & Smith, K.A. (2000). Cooperative learning: Increasing college faculty instructional productivity. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass.
Kerr, N. L. (1983). Motivation losses in small groups: A social dilemma analysis. Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 819–828.
Kerr, N. L., & Bruun, S. E. (1983). Dispensability of member effort and group motivation losses: free rider effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 78–94.
Kezar, A. (2005). Redesigning for collaboration within higher education institutions: An exploration into the developmental process. Research in Higher Education, 46(7), 831–860.
Klemm, W. R. (1997). Benefits of collaboration software for on-site classes. Teaching in the Community Colleges 1996-2007 Presentations.
Kolloffel, B., Eysink, T. H. S., & Jong, T. (2011). Comparing the effects of representational tools in collaborative and individual inquiry learning. International Journal of Computer-supported Collaborative Learning, 6(2), 232–251.
Lai, E. R. (2011). Collaboration: A literature review. Pearson Research Report, 2.
McAlpine, I. (2000). Collaborative learning online. Distance Education, 21(1), 66–80.
Raths, D. (2013). Togetherware: Tools for teamwork. Campus Technology, 26(6), 18-22.
Roberts. T. S., & McInnerney, J. M. (2007). Seven problems of online group learning (and their solutions). Educational Technology & Society, 10(4), 257-268.
Tu, C. (2004). Online collaborative learning communities: Twenty-one designs to building. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Tutty, J. I., & Klein, J. D. (2008). Computer-mediated instruction: a comparison of online and face-to-face collaboration. Education Technology Research and Development, 56, 101–124.
Van Boxtel, C., Van der Linden, J., & Kanselaar, G. (2000). Collaborative learning tasks and the elaboration of conceptual knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 10(4), 311–330.
Wagar, T., & Carroll, W. 2012. Examining Student Preferences of Group Work Evaluation Approaches: Evidence From Business Management Undergraduate Students. Journal of Education for Business, 87 (6).
Yazici, H. J. (2009). A study of collaborative learning style and team learning performance. Education and Training, 47(3), 216–229.
